5 Republican Senators Write Letter to AG Claiming 'Unequal Justice' of Capitol "Rioters" Compared to other Protesters!

[pknopp]

An unequal justice system? You don't say. Maybe they should have cared about this long before now.

Ted Cruz blasts ‘hypocrite’ Dems for ‘cheering on’ BLM & Antifa

And yet Ted will complain about an unfair justice system while condemning those protesting over an unfair justice system.

What are you even trying to say?

You understand. Ted is a hypocrite.

In the opinion of conservatives, antifa and blm are marxists who are using race to rile up the masses and have riots. Their goals are NOT primarily or even majorly about "unequal justice".

Thus, having that position, while being against unequal justice in another example,


is not hypocrisy.


you are assuming he agrees with you on antifa and blm and then judging him based on that assumption.


That is a manifestation of you, not being able to grasp that other people disagree with you.


Which, is kind of lame.

No I do not assume that. I was simply commenting on this article.

 

[SavannahMann]

Stupid bastards had to run for their lives.

Do you even understand the issue?

Better than you apparently.

Your previous post indicates that is not the case.


There is nothing in the op, or the republicans' letter that suggests that the 1/6 riot was not a violent crime.


SO you are arguing against a point that no one is making.


That indicates that you are NOT understanding the issue, at all.

I'll spell it out for you. These people attacked the US government at it's source trying to overturn the election. In an effort to make sure this does not happen every time you people lose an election the penalties have to be as steep as the law allows. You and these jerk ass senators don't have to like it.

So, you WANT to have unequal justice even though it is a violation of the civil rights of the accused?

I stand corrected. I was giving you the benefit of a doubt, that you did not understand the issue.

But instead I see that you fully want violation of civil rights of Americans as government policy.

Mmm, Yes, i do not like it. If you succeed and hold these people as political prisoners, you will be tyrants.

That will be a dangerous escalation in our partisan conflict.

Two guys get into a fight in a bar over a sports argument. One dies. Is that premeditated Murder? Most courts would call it Manslaughter. Most people would too.

But it turns out that the guy who died went to the bar specifically to find the guy he fought with. OK, now the story changes. The intent of the participants matters. Now that manslaughter charge seems a little problematic. Perhaps the guy who survived was acting in self defense.

To argue that the riots in Portland are exactly the same as the 1-6 riots at the capital you have to ignore several key facts. First, why the rioters at the Capital chose that particular date to arrive. You have to pretend it was a coincidence that they were there on that day. And the name of the Rally was “stop the steal”.

Fiction writers call it the ability to suspend disbelief. You can’t ask someone to suspend that much disbelief for the story.

They weren’t there to protest. That went out the window when they rushed into the building. They weren’t there to steal some TV’s and such in looting orgies. They sought out specific locations where their ideological opponents were. Nancy Pelosi’s office as one example.

There is one reason they were in the Capital. To stop the steal. To stop the transfer of power from Trump to Biden. And that is not simple rioting. Just as a guy dying in a bar fight is not Premeditated Murder, unless the killer went looking for that specific victim.

I agree that intent matters.

But, the intent here was simply to have a better count. That does not justify harsher penalties.

The reason, imo, that dems are going after these rioters more than the other rioters, is because they are rioters from the other side.

Take Georgia as an example of your “better count”. Each party has observers at the polls. Each party has observers at the rooms where the votes are counted. These are people with eyes, cell phones, and a number to report violations to the party headquarters.

Republicans with eyes, cell phones, and the number to report problems.

At the Secretary of States office there are observers to keep an eye on what is happening there. The Secretary of State is a Republican.

Now there are only two ways that the count could be wrong. 1) Republicans at every level from poll observer on up was involved in a massive conspiracy. And not just in Georgia but this conspiracy would have to be massive involving thousands of people. In Hollywood it would stretch the imagination beyond the breaking point.

Option 2) The Now you see me tricks. Magicians using slight of hand and hypnosis tricked the observers and everyone involved to honestly believe they did not see anything untoward during the collection and counting of votes.

This is not happening in a sealed room with one person behind a closed door. There are several people there. All watching and all that.

Then there is the recount. This is where the Republican Watchers are paying even more attention. And they report essentially. Nothing.

So the scenarios put forth to explain how the election was stolen become even more insane. Democrats running ballots through a second or fifth time is not likely with watchers standing right there from the Republican Party. Voting Machines tampered with while Republicans are in charge of the election and approving the programming? Unless you say the Republicans are incompetent and unsuited for the office. Nope.

So a real count has been done. And redone. And done again. And the results are the same.

But even in your scenario. Where the protestors bum rushed the capital to demand a real count, their intent was still to prevent the peaceful transition of power in accordance with the Constitution. Back to the kissing cousin of Treason.

 

[Correll]

An unequal justice system? You don't say. Maybe they should have cared about this long before now.

Ted Cruz blasts ‘hypocrite’ Dems for ‘cheering on’ BLM & Antifa

And yet Ted will complain about an unfair justice system while condemning those protesting over an unfair justice system.

What are you even trying to say?

You understand. Ted is a hypocrite.

In the opinion of conservatives, antifa and blm are marxists who are using race to rile up the masses and have riots. Their goals are NOT primarily or even majorly about "unequal justice".

Thus, having that position, while being against unequal justice in another example,


is not hypocrisy.


you are assuming he agrees with you on antifa and blm and then judging him based on that assumption.


That is a manifestation of you, not being able to grasp that other people disagree with you.


Which, is kind of lame.

No I do not assume that. I was simply commenting on this article.

Your comment only makes sense, if you did assume that.


It is not hypocritical to oppose the unequal application of justice to the 1/6 rioters, unless you are contrasting that to him supporting the unequal application of justice in another situation.

 

[pknopp]

An unequal justice system? You don't say. Maybe they should have cared about this long before now.

Ted Cruz blasts ‘hypocrite’ Dems for ‘cheering on’ BLM & Antifa

And yet Ted will complain about an unfair justice system while condemning those protesting over an unfair justice system.

What are you even trying to say?

You understand. Ted is a hypocrite.

In the opinion of conservatives, antifa and blm are marxists who are using race to rile up the masses and have riots. Their goals are NOT primarily or even majorly about "unequal justice".

Thus, having that position, while being against unequal justice in another example,


is not hypocrisy.


you are assuming he agrees with you on antifa and blm and then judging him based on that assumption.


That is a manifestation of you, not being able to grasp that other people disagree with you.


Which, is kind of lame.

No I do not assume that. I was simply commenting on this article.

Your comment only makes sense, if you did assume that.


It is not hypocritical to oppose the unequal application of justice to the 1/6 rioters, unless you are contrasting that to him supporting the unequal application of justice in another situation.

I posted where he did that. That does not mean I think he believes both sides of the argument are equals. He does not.

 

[SavannahMann]

The problem is the intent of each group of “protestors”.

The Protestor in Portland. In that crowd you’ll have people who are furious at the cops. They want to scream and shout. If given half a chance they may stomp on a cop the way they saw a relative, friend, neighbor, or just fellow citizen stomped by the cops. Some want to loot. Some want to destroy private property. They want change to the social order, granted. They want accountability for those in power over them.

Now, the intent of those on January Sixth. They were not there on that day as a coincidence. They were there on that day because it was the day we certify the results of the election, officially naming the President, and Vice President.

I’ve said before and I absolutely stand by this statement. The people on that day were the biggest idiots in the world. I’m talking absolute morons. They had no plan. If they had stayed outside, shouting and waving placards, burning various individuals in effigy. Whatever. I wouldn’t have raised an issue at all. I would have shrugged and said who cares?

But they went inside. They went inside to try and disrupt at a minimum the certification of the election.

This is why I say that they had no plan. Nothing they had considered. Let’s say they bum rushed the House Chambers, and held everyone prisoner inside until Trump was named as President. What then? Even an idiot would know that ten seconds after they were released the members would hold another vote and name Biden as President. I mean it isn’t rocket science.

So some in the crowd knew they would have to kill the members of Congress. How many in the crowd thought that way? I don’t know, and it doesn’t matter.

Again it is intent.

Let’s say there are two nearly identical DUI accidents. In both cases an innocent is killed. The drivers are both first offenders. But it turns out one of them hated the victim. He hated the victim and wanted him dead. So he covered the murder up as a simple DUI accident knowing that with the right lawyer, and some patience, he could get at most a couple years for the crime.

Same actions, same result, different motivations.

So even if you argue the riots in Portland are exactly the same, they aren’t are they? The people there in the Capital on 1-6 weren’t looting were they? Their intent wasn’t to steal some TV’s or the new X-Box or some clothing. Their intent wasn’t to Burn it to the ground. They were there to stop the peaceful transition of power from A to B.

Again if they had stayed outside and ranted and raved I would shrug and argue anyone upset by this is an idiot. But they didn’t stay outside.

And you can’t come up with a reasonable or believable excuse for them entering except the intent to disrupt the votes and stop them naming Biden as President.

That may not be Treason, but it is a Kissing Cousin to Treason. Which you can’t say about some idiots in the Twin Cities burning down a Laundry.

How did you make the leap of logic that they knew they had to kill members of Congress? It was a protest that a small number of protestors took too far. The narrative that they were "dangerous" excuses something like shooting an unarmed woman in the neck. Were they really dangerous? They didn't have weapons. How is it exactly that you overthrow the Government when you're not armed? How does that work exactly? This was more like a college "sit in" from when I was a kid than an "insurrection"! Let's be honest about it...

A few people at a sit in. Breaking down doors?

I said “some in the crowd”. Some would know they had to kill Congress to really succeed.

 

[mdk]

Starting a thread requires some original content more than just copying and pasting an article. Closed.