Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=Giantone;1314460]Getting back to trumps/chico's people who were peacefully protesting..............



[url]https://news.yahoo.com/man-faces-sentencing-bringing-guns-100916386.html[/url]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An Alabama man on Friday could be sentenced to more than three years in prison for bringing a pickup truck full of firearms, ammunition, and Molotov cocktails to Washington on Jan. 6, 2021, when former President Donald Trump's supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol.

Lonnie Coffman, 72, who already pleaded guilty to possessing unregistered firearms, is due to face a federal judge at 10 a.m. ET (1400 GMT).

Coffman faces 37 to 46 months in prison under federal sentencing guidelines. U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who is hearing Coffman's case, has the authority to go below that range.
Coffman has been in custody since his arrest on Jan. 6, 2021, and his lawyer has argued that further incarceration is not warranted in light of his age, health, remorse and acceptance of responsibility.

Police officers arrested Coffman near the Capitol after noticing the handle of a gun in his pickup truck while they were responding to pipe bombs left outside the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee, both of which are near the Capitol.

Inside Coffman's truck, officers found an AR-15-style rifle, a shotgun, a crossbow, several machetes, smoke grenades and 11 Molotov cocktails. They also found a note with the name of at least one member of Congress and a judge, alongside the notation "bad guy."

Prosecutors said at the time that the combination of weapons and political messages “suggest that these weapons were intended to be used in an effort to violently attack our elected representatives.”[/quote]

[url]https://www.reuters.com/world/us/man-faces-sentencing-bringing-guns-molotov-cocktails-us-capitol-ahead-riot-2022-04-01/[/url]

Came up with a new headline for you G1.

"Guy who should be retired and enjoying life is instead sentenced to almost 4 years in prison because he let a reality-tv show host convince him to overthrow the government."

Nice.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

First acquittal in a trial case for a rioter.

[url]https://www.npr.org/2022/04/07/1091392445/jan-6-riot-acquittal[/url]

I have a hard time with the judge's logic that it was reasonable to believe Martin was allowed to storm the Capitol.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=BaltimoreSkins;1314687]First acquittal in a trial case for a rioter.

[url]https://www.npr.org/2022/04/07/1091392445/jan-6-riot-acquittal[/url]

I have a hard time with the judge's logic that it was reasonable to believe Martin was allowed to storm the Capitol.[/quote]

McFadden, who was nominated by former President Donald Trump, acquitted Martin of all four counts for which he was charged.

McFadden said it was reasonable for Martin to believe that outnumbered police officers allowed him and others to enter the Capitol through the Rotunda doors on Jan. 6, 2021. The judge also said Martin's actions were "about as minimal and non-serious" as anyone who was at the Capitol that day.

-------------------

Sounds like the judge skewed his "neutral fact finder" role in a non-jury case to reach the pre destined outcome the judge wanted.

I dont know the federal trespassing on the Capitol code or statute but it sounds like a "reasonable person" standard. "Would a reasonable person under the circumstances believe they were allowed to enter the Capitol?" ... theres no way in hell the judge actually thought a reasonable person would believe they were allowed to do what they did.

If the guy just walked into the Capitol, didnt hit any officers, then left .. I dont really care. Probably did a few days or more in pre trial detention.

Criminal defendants have a right to be tried by a judge and not a jury, their choice to waive jury trial.

Smart move. Get in front of a trump judge.

-------------

You want to talk about rogue judges applying their own bias and not the law .... but whatever just wouldnt trust this judge.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=SunnySide;1314690]McFadden, who was nominated by former President Donald Trump, acquitted Martin of all four counts for which he was charged.

McFadden said it was reasonable for Martin to believe that outnumbered police officers allowed him and others to enter the Capitol through the Rotunda doors on Jan. 6, 2021. The judge also said Martin's actions were "about as minimal and non-serious" as anyone who was at the Capitol that day.

-------------------

Sounds like the judge skewed his "neutral fact finder" role in a non-jury case to reach the pre destined outcome the judge wanted.

I dont know the federal trespassing on the Capitol code or statute but it sounds like a "reasonable person" standard. "Would a reasonable person under the circumstances believe they were allowed to enter the Capitol?" ... theres no way in hell the judge actually thought a reasonable person would believe they were allowed to do what they did.

If the guy just walked into the Capitol, didnt hit any officers, then left .. I dont really care. Probably did a few days or more in pre trial detention.

Criminal defendants have a right to be tried by a judge and not a jury, their choice to waive jury trial.

Smart move. Get in front of a trump judge.

-------------

You want to talk about rogue judges applying their own bias and not the law .... but whatever just wouldnt trust this judge.[/quote]
The Prosecutor should file an appeal but with so many people it's useless.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=Giantone;1314702]The Prosecutor should file an appeal but with so many people it's useless.[/quote]

Lolololol

Yes G1 let’s set fire to Constitutional rights

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[QUOTE=Chico23231;1314712]Lolololol

Yes G1 let’s set fire to Constitutional rights[/QUOTE]


You’re such a good little Trumper using the constitution as a shiny object.

Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

Can you imagine what Chico and the rest of the Trumpers would be saying if BLM had done this to make a statement about racial inequality instead of a lie about a stolen election?. Omg.

I mean Trump would have had them all killed but if they somehow managed to get away with it to this point? Chico would have had a mental breakdown a long time ago. Instead its just white people adhering to the constitution. Lol. Ok.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=Giantone;1314702]The Prosecutor should file an appeal but with so many people it's useless.[/quote]

Appeals based on factual determinations are near impossible as review courts defer to the fact finder who actually heard the evidence at trial vs superimposing their own view from reading a record. Courts give trials deference.

Appeals based on misapplication of law or judicial error .. those have legs. Standard is lower.

This judge (and every judge, even your district court county judge) knows that if they want an appeal proof judgment to try and base decision on a finding of fact.
---------

Had a bench trial 2 weeks ago, hit and run car accident, small case. Defense stipulated to liability in the hopes it would be inadmissible to introduce evidence of the hit and run. I had my client testify as to hit and run. defense objects and puts their "objection on the record" which indicates you are going to appeal. Defense moved for mistrial. judge denied.

Judge clearly stated on the record that he would not consider the hit and run testimony in reaching his verdict.

Judge gave me 3 times my specials (i was expecting 2) ... he took the hit and run into account but made an appeal proof record that he wouldnt.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=SunnySide;1314719]Appeals based on factual determinations are near impossible as review courts defer to the fact finder who actually heard the evidence at trial vs superimposing their own view from reading a record. Courts give trials deference.

Appeals based on misapplication of law or judicial error .. those have legs. Standard is lower.

This judge (and every judge, even your district court county judge) knows that if they want an appeal proof judgment to try and base decision on a finding of fact.
---------

Had a bench trial 2 weeks ago, hit and run car accident, small case. Defense stipulated to liability in the hopes it would be inadmissible to introduce evidence of the hit and run. I had my client testify as to hit and run. defense objects and puts their "objection on the record" which indicates you are going to appeal. Defense moved for mistrial. judge denied.

Judge clearly stated on the record that he would not consider the hit and run testimony in reaching his verdict.

Judge gave me 3 times my specials (i was expecting 2) ... he took the hit and run into account but made an appeal proof record that he wouldnt.[/quote]

So after a prosecution and the defendant has been acquitted, can the prosecution file an appeal of a jury or judge decision? Seems like that might be a problem

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=Chico23231;1314724]So after a prosecution and the defendant has been acquitted, can the prosecution file an appeal of a jury or judge decision? Seems like that might be a problem[/quote]

Good question, im a low rent ambulance chaser dont do criminal but youd think double jeopardy attaches.

Id say no. You can file an appeal but itd probably be DOA.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=SunnySide;1314719]Appeals based on factual determinations are near impossible as review courts defer to the fact finder who actually heard the evidence at trial vs superimposing their own view from reading a record. Courts give trials deference.

Appeals based on misapplication of law or judicial error .. those have legs. Standard is lower.

This judge (and every judge, even your district court county judge) knows that if they want an appeal proof judgment to try and base decision on a finding of fact.
---------

Had a bench trial 2 weeks ago, hit and run car accident, small case. Defense stipulated to liability in the hopes it would be inadmissible to introduce evidence of the hit and run. I had my client testify as to hit and run. defense objects and puts their "objection on the record" which indicates you are going to appeal. Defense moved for mistrial. judge denied.

Judge clearly stated on the record that he would not consider the hit and run testimony in reaching his verdict.

Judge gave me 3 times my specials (i was expecting 2) ... he took the hit and run into account but made an appeal proof record that he wouldnt.[/quote]



judicial error. The man had no right to be in the building, it was closed to the public. Had the MOB not broken in there is reasonable expectation he would not have been allowed in. If after being broken into a Capital Police Officer was trying to calm the situation by not attempting to remove the mob does not or can not be assumed permission of entrance.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=Chico23231;1314712]Lolololol

Yes G1 let’s set fire to Constitutional rights[/quote]

Acquitted vs. Not Guilty – Is There a Difference?
Posted on August 17, 2020

While an acquittal is a general term for a not guilty verdict, there is a subtle difference between the two terms under criminal law. Not guilty means that a defendant is not legally answerable for the criminal charge filed against him/her. An acquittal is a finding by a judge or jury that a defendant is not guilty of the crime charged.

Note that an acquittal does not mean that the defendant is innocent in a criminal case. Rather, it means that the prosecutor failed to prove that the defendant was guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Note too that an acquittal is not the same thing as when charges get dismissed. A dismissal comes before a jury trial and usually takes place because:

the prosecutor does not believe there is enough evidence to support the case, or
the judge decides a case lacks credibility.
In a dismissal, the case against the defendant ends and he/she does not have to stand trial.

If a judge or jury acquits a defendant, then double jeopardy attaches and the defendant has a complete defense to an additional prosecution for the same offense in the same jurisdiction

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=punch it in;1314715]You’re such a good little Trumper using the constitution as a shiny object.[/quote]

Hey Punch! Hope you are well. At least it’s Friday

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=SunnySide;1314725]Good question, im a low rent ambulance chaser dont do criminal but youd think double jeopardy attaches.

Id say no. You can file an appeal but itd probably be DOA.[/quote]

Thanks SS.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

The Republican party is a shit show! I actual remember when people would be thrown out of Congress for shit like Jan 6th.


[url]https://news.yahoo.com/mccarthy-feared-republican-lawmakers-put-113418203.html[/url]

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

How is trump not in Jail? If I joked about something like that the SS would come get my ass!

[url]https://news.yahoo.com/trump-expressed-support-hanging-pence-173510960.html[/url]



Susan Walsh/AP Photo
Betsy Woodruff Swan and Kyle Cheney
Wed, May 25, 2022, 1:35 PM

The Jan. 6 select committee has heard testimony indicating that then-President Donald Trump — after rioters who swarmed the Capitol began chanting “hang Mike Pence” — expressed support for hanging his vice president, according to three people familiar with the matter.

The White House chief of staff at the time, Mark Meadows, was in the dining room off the Oval Office with Trump at one point during last year’s Capitol attack, the committee has been told. Meadows then left the dining room and informed other people nearby that Trump had signaled a positive view of the prospect of hanging the vice president, the panel heard.

Meadows’ account as it was described to the committee came after some members of the mob converging on the Capitol had broken into chants of “Hang Mike Pence!” Those chants were a reaction to Pence's decision to accept electoral votes that indicated Joe Biden had won the presidency.

POLITICO could not independently verify the veracity of the claim regarding Meadows’ comments.

Two of the people who spoke for this story said the committee has heard testimony on this topic from more than one person. All three people spoke on condition of anonymity.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[url]https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-says-ivanka-trump-doesnt-understand-elections-after-she-disowned-his-claim-that-the-2020-vote-was-stolen/ar-AAYiM31?li=BBnb7Kz[/url]

"My sweet, supple, perky, innocent daughter doesn't understand these highly complex elections and how the dingleberry Dems with their pea-brains could mastermind such a dastardly assault on democracy. But we won't let them! Trump 2020!"

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=mooby;1317427][url]https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-says-ivanka-trump-doesnt-understand-elections-after-she-disowned-his-claim-that-the-2020-vote-was-stolen/ar-AAYiM31?li=BBnb7Kz[/url]

"My sweet, supple, perky, innocent daughter doesn't understand these highly complex elections and how the dingleberry Dems with their pea-brains could mastermind such a dastardly assault on democracy. But we won't let them! Trump 2020!"[/quote]

Donald Trump and Dan Snyder must be great friends. They have so much in common.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[QUOTE=mooby;1317427][url]https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-says-ivanka-trump-doesnt-understand-elections-after-she-disowned-his-claim-that-the-2020-vote-was-stolen/ar-AAYiM31?li=BBnb7Kz[/url]

"My sweet, supple, perky, innocent daughter doesn't understand these highly complex elections and how the dingleberry Dems with their pea-brains could mastermind such a dastardly assault on democracy. But we won't let them! Trump 2020!"[/QUOTE]


Imagine being so creepy that you refer to your daughter as supple and perky. He truly is the scum of the earth.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[url]https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34070358/washington-commanders-defensive-coordinator-jack-del-rio-fined-100000-comments-us-capitol-invasion-george-floyd-murder[/url]

Donating 100 k to the Capitol police fund for future “dust ups”. What an asshole.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=punch it in;1317454]Imagine being so creepy that you refer to your daughter as supple and perky. He truly is the scum of the earth.[/quote]

Haha sorry punch, he didn't say that. But you know he was thinking it.

Fun fact - he actually [URL="https://youtu.be/uAo0xXn_Syk"]wrote this song about Ivanka[/URL] and gave it to Isaac Hayes to sing.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

No trumpettes posting?
They must be busy organizing
[url]https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/white-supremacists-are-riling-up-thousands-on-social-media[/url]

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

Just for you trump faithful and you know who you are here is a man who throws his own child under the bus. You need to come out and denounce this man for the criminal he is.



[url]https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-fires-back-ivanka-bill-barr-jan-deposition/story?id=85310275[/url]


Posting to Truth Social -- the social media network Trump launched after being kicked off Twitter -- Trump continued to repeat false claims about the 2020 election as he mocked the committee's work and lashed out at comments Ivanka Trump and former Attorney General Bill Barr made in videotaped depositions.

"Ivanka Trump was not involved in looking at, or studying, Election results," Trump wrote after she said she agreed with Barr's assessment that there was no amount of fraud sufficient enough to overturn his loss.

"It affected my perspective," Ivanka Trump told the committee about Barr's assessment. "I respect Attorney General Barr, so I accepted what he was saying."

Trump fired back Friday that Ivanka "had long since checked out, and was, in my opinion, only trying to be respectful to Bill Barr and his position as Attorney General (he sucked!)."

In one interview aired in the hearing, Barr recounted telling Trump the idea that the presidential race was rigged was "bull****."


Barr said he "repeatedly told the president in no uncertain terms that I did not see evidence of fraud and -- you know, that would have affected the outcome of the election. And frankly, a year and a half later, I haven't seen anything to change my mind on that."

Trump on Friday called Barr "weak and frightened" and denounced the committee once again as the "Unselect Committee."

Cheney said the testimony claims Trump expressed support for threats of violence against then-Vice President Mike Pence.

"Aware of the rioters' chants to 'hang Mike Pence,' the president responded with this sentiment: 'Maybe our supporters have the right idea. Mike Pence 'deserves' it," Cheney said.

Last year, Trump told ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent Jonathan Karl that he didn't worry about Pence's safety during the Capitol riot and thought he was "well-protected."

"They were saying 'hang Mike Pence,'" Karl reminded Trump.

"Because it's common sense, Jon," Trump responded. "It's common sense that you're supposed to protect. How can you -- if you know a vote is fraudulent, right? -- how can you pass on a fraudulent vote to Congress? How can you do that?

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

Liz Cheney is an absolute rock star for the Jan. 6th committee. Check out this interview they had with the WH lawyer who told Eastman he better find a fucking great criminal lawyer.

[url]https://twitter.com/January6thCmte/status/1536815728208355330[/url]

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=NC_Skins;1317598]Liz Cheney is an absolute rock star for the Jan. 6th committee. Check out this interview they had with the WH lawyer who told Eastman he better find a fucking great criminal lawyer.

[url]https://twitter.com/January6thCmte/status/1536815728208355330[/url][/quote]

never liked her Dad but I like her a lot. She needs to run against trump!

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

I'll put this here, those of you know who you are should read it.

This is an Opinion article.

[url]https://news.yahoo.com/c-mon-trumpers-much-longer-191640700.html[/url]

C’mon, Trumpers, how much longer will you fall for the con? Oh, that long . . . |



I won’t bother reasoning with you.

As I’ve said before in this space, it’s my opinion that you folks who support Donald Trump are, by definition, incapable of that function, so it’s foolish to even try. You may think that’s harsh. I think it’s time-saving.

But I do have a question for you: Don’t you feel kind of stupid right now? Doesn’t the revelation that it was all a con leave you feeling like a sucker? Doesn’t simple human pride have you smarting, at least a little bit?

Or maybe you have no idea what I’m talking about. After all, Fox “News” and other elements of the conservative media omniplex have studiously avoided giving much attention to the hearings of the House select committee investigating the attempted coup of Jan. 6, 2021. For the rest of us, they’ve become must-see TV, but you’ve likely been shielded from them.

So you may not have heard Monday’s revelation that not even members of Trump’s own inner circle — his daughter, his aides, his attorney general — believed his absurd claim that he was cheated out of the 2020 election. Lawyer Eric Herschmann thought it was “nuts.” Attorney General William Barr feared your guy was “detached from reality.”

But — and here’s the part that relates to you — even though his own people told him quite clearly that there was no election fraud, he still told you something else: a bizarre fable about a vast and byzantine conspiracy involving Democrats, Republicans, poll workers, truck drivers, a polling machine manufacturer and — who knows? — maybe Bigfoot on the grassy knoll. We all know how that lie brought thousands of you to the National Mall in the attack on the U.S. Capitol. What is less often discussed is that he also used this lie to tap folks like you for donations to the tune of a quarter of a billion dollars.

It bears repeating: a quarter . . . of a billion . . . dollars.




click the link to read the rest of the story.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

A con man gonna con

Suckers born every minute

The big lie was more like the big rip off

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

Chico and others, how much money have you donated to the cause of preventing Democratic election fraud?

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=mooby;1317677]Chico and others, how much money have you donated to the cause of preventing Democratic election fraud?[/quote]

LOL!!!

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=mooby;1317677]Chico and others, how much money have you donated to the cause of preventing Democratic election fraud?[/quote]

$1,000 - $1,000 = $0.00

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[QUOTE=sdskinsfan2001;1317681]$1,000 - $1,000 = $0.00[/QUOTE]


Split that in half and then double it!

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=sdskinsfan2001;1317681]$1,000 - $1,000 = $0.00[/quote]

Why haven't you donated? You do believe in the cause, don't you?

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=mooby;1317706]Why haven't you donated? You do believe in the cause, don't you?[/quote]

When have I ever said anything about election fraud?

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=sdskinsfan2001;1317711]When have I ever said anything about election fraud?[/quote]

So you agree trump lost and that he is lying to the public about it being a stolen election?

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=Giantone;1317722]So you agree trump lost and that he is lying to the public about it being a stolen election?[/quote]

Yes. I believe he lost, and I've never once said anything different.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=sdskinsfan2001;1317723]Yes. I believe he lost, and I've never once said anything different.[/quote]

You must have somehow ended up in the wrong bucket. That's really weird.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=Giantone;1317722]So you agree trump lost and that he is lying to the public about it being a stolen election?[/quote]

Hillary, Stacy Abrams and Trump all have lied about complaining their election losses were stolen.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=Chico23231;1317725]Hillary, Stacy Abrams and Trump all have lied about complaining their election losses were stolen.[/quote]

No they didn't , asking for a recount and never conceding are two different things.

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[quote=sdskinsfan2001;1317723]Yes. I believe he lost, and I've never once said anything different.[/quote]

So you believe trump is lying about a stolen election?

Re: Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition
 

[B]Partisan voters claim, ‘We wuz robbed.’ No, they weren’t[/B]

[url]https://rollcall.com/2021/02/24/partisan-voters-claim-we-wuz-robbed-no-they-werent/[/url]

[I]"Elected officials need to explore what’s happening to voter confidence and get a better understanding of what it would take for disillusioned citizens to regain trust. And perhaps, in a moment of self-reflection, ask themselves what role they’ve been playing as leaders in eroding the confidence in our electoral system."[/I]