Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
What happened to Trump bought those people to DC. They already had a purpose. Trump did nothing but say make yourselves heard. The Congress did not hear them. The election should have been investigated by Congress and certification should have been delayed until that happened. Congress had done it before.Is inciting riots against the U.S. government, treason?
There’s no doubt that President Donald Trump did incite his followers to riot.
Respectfully, Supposn
No one at the riot was at Trumps speech RETARD, the riot started before the speech.So your thought is that the guys in riot helmets, flak jackets and military fatigues were going to riot anyway and Trump just happened to be giving a speech...they stopped and listened and then went on about their rioting?
How did he do that? Let me guess! You watch CNN or MSDNC all the time!Is inciting riots against the U.S. government, treason?
There’s no doubt that President Donald Trump did incite his followers to riot.
Respectfully, Supposn
Agreed. There has to be a declared enemy, and there isn't one.No, treason has been decided to mean giving aid to an enemy. An insurrection doesn't fall in that catagory. For one thing a formal state of war has ro exist for treason to be possible.
Forkup, you're correct. Specifically refer to:No, treason has been decided to mean giving aid to an enemy. An insurrection doesn't fall in that catagory. For one thing a formal state of war has ro exist for treason to be possible.
The OP asked a direct question, I answered it directly to the best of my ability. I think when you describe something avoiding hyperbole when the hyperbole is also incorrect is good practice.Forkup, you're correct. Specifically refer to:
18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu)
... 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.
////////////////////
18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu)
... Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
Admiral Rockwell Tory, excerpted from two of my posts within the thread, “ Public hearings regarding the insurrection riots have begun too soon. | US Message Board ? Political Discussion Forum “. Some of the rioters when pleaded guilty to lesser charges, stated they acted upon Donald Trump's wishes and urgings.How did he do that, [i.e. incite his followers to riot]? Let me guess! You watch CNN or MSDNC all the time!
Intent indeed has meaning in court. However, at what point does ignorance becomes willful? I've been on this board for years and what strikes me is that it, isn't so much a difference in ideology but a genuine refusal of even considering the other's point of view.Paranoia, ignorance, stupidity are not crimes.
The problem with that is practical. In a few months, it is midterms. The reality of the situation is, that if the Republicans win, the moment they take over, any congressional investigation is stopped regardless of the department of justice. And while the department of justice might be capable of dealing with the legal ramifications of what happened. (Something I don't think likely considering they aren't just considering those.) They are wholly incapable of dealing with political ramifications. For that you need congress.I would have preferred the congressional committee would continue gathering testimony and affidavits but had not held any public hearings until the Department of Justice had cleared or filed charges against Donald Trump and his associates within and outside of the White House.
Wouldn't it? The FBI would refer to the DOJ, who would indict at wich point they would share the available evidence with the defense counsel. I also want to point out that the FBI can get all the information the committee has gathered by showing probable cause. Why would they need the information congress has gathered?The house committee could continuously share all testimony, affidavits with the FBI. That sharing would somewhat hinder, (but not certainly prevent) any following administration or congressional sessions" efforts to “hide evidence under the rug” prior to elections.
Admiral Rockwell Tory, excerpted from two of my posts within the thread, “ Public hearings regarding the insurrection riots have begun too soon. | US Message Board ? Political Discussion Forum “. Some of the rioters when pleaded guilty to lesser charges, stated they acted upon Donald Trump's wishes and urgings.
Respectfully, Supposn
///////////////
Sunsettommy, you may or may not be correct. I would suppose that most of those that pleaded guilty January 6th rioters had been threatened with the charge of insurrection; it's a more difficult charge to prove in court. Paranoia, ignorance, stupidity are not crimes. …
///////////////
I would have preferred the congressional committee would continue gathering testimony and affidavits but had not held any public hearings until the Department of Justice had cleared or filed charges against Donald Trump and his associates within and outside of the White House.
The house committee could continuously share all testimony, affidavits with the FBI. That sharing would somewhat hinder, (but not certainly prevent) any following administration or congressional sessions" efforts to “hide evidence under the rug” prior to elections. ...
Meister, Toobfreak, Lastamender, Retired GY Sgt, Admiral Rockwell Tory, Forkup, after the 2022 general elections, while still president, Donald Trump claimed his presidency had been “stolen”.... It seems to me that you, [i.e. Supposn] solely consider this from a legal point of view. In my opinion that is less important than the political ramifications. Wether or not people get charged with actual crimes is less important than wether or not the possibility of this happening again is minimized. The DOJ is simply not the vehicle to do the latter because it by necessity handles only a very narrow question.
Lies, lies and misinformation! The "riot' started while Trump was still at the White House. During his speech he urged the people to protest peacefully at the Capitol. After he knew of the riot, how do you (or anyone else for that matter) propose that he should have stopped it?Meister, Toobfreak, Lastamender, Retired GY Sgt, Admiral Rockwell Tory, Forkup, after the 2022 general elections, while still president, Donald Trump claimed his presidency had been “stolen”.
IMO (if he didn't then know his claims were false), he certainly continued to deliberately ignore what many of his own associates and congressional Republicans who told him his contentions were not based upon facts and were not correct. , he continued to deliberately ignore all evidence and contrary to his false contentions.
The majority of U.S. voters voted against Trump and believe his contentions are completely false.
While still in office, Trump did urge his followers to march to the Capitol Building and protest against the certification of the state's electors;
Trump and his White House associates did nothing that might have halted or reduced the extent of the seditious rioting mob's activities, but Trump and some of his associates did to some extents prevented any federal activity that could have reduced the mob's criminal activities.
Ignorance and stupidity are detrimental to individuals and their nations' societies, but they're not in themselves crimes. The question that should be asked is to what extent did Donald Trump and his associates within and outside of the White House commit any crimes?
IMO, certainly to some extents they urged and supported the criminal January 6th mob, and that was a seditious mob.
It will be unjust if the U.S. Justice Department, (i.e.USJD) fails to clear or indict Donald Trump and some of his associates within and outside of the White House of any crimes they committed; or if the USJD offers or permits them to plea-bargain down the severity of those indictments; because such injustices would more enable such crimes to again occur in our nation's future.
It would be unjust if the USJD provided Donald Trump and his associates any greater considerations denied to lesser well connected or lesser wealthy participants of the January 6th riots. Respectfully. Supposn
Admiral Rockwell Tory, you're correct, the mob started gathering near the Capitol Building hours before and Trump began his speech at about noon.Lies, lies and misinformation! The "riot' started while Trump was still at the White House. During his speech he urged the people to protest peacefully at the Capitol. After he knew of the riot, how do you (or anyone else for that matter) propose that he should have stopped it?
Respectfully, the Democrats stole the election. He had every right to do what he did, none of which was illegal. Your naivete is astounding! Are you a Trump-hating liberal?Admiral Rockwell Tory, you're correct, the mob started gathering near the Capitol Building hours before and Trump began his speech at about noon.
When the results of 2022 general elections were broadcasted, President Donald Trump began disseminating his wishful face-saving lie. Participants of January sixth's seditious riot were those sufficiently foolish and ignorant to accept Trump's unsubstantiated great lie.
Trump was aware of the riot, and rather than sincerely trying to stop it, he directly and indirectly hindered additional federal and state police or militia from coming the assistance of those besieged at the Capitol Building. Respectfully, Supposn
Respectfully, the Democrats stole the election. He had every right to do what he did, none of which was illegal. Your naivete is astounding! Are you a Trump-hating liberal?
Your highlighted statement is a bald-faced lie! Where did you come up with that large, steaming pile of male bovine excrement?
Trump offered the National Guard, but Nasty Pelousey and Mayor Bowwow turned him down days before January 6th.
Newsflash: There is no state police in DC, because it is not ... wait for it, a state!
What grade are you going to be in this fall at your middle school?
I'm just supposn you understand my post.
Admiral Rockwell Tory, referring to Who called in the National Guard in DC, US Capital Building | wusa9.com : “... both Northam [i.e. governor of Virginia] and Hogan [, i.e. governor of Maryland] also have sent state police troopers to DC to help law enforcement with the violence. ...”.
Also referring to What is the difference between the U.S. Army, the National Guard and the State Guard? – Open Source Your Mind :
"… Each state has their own National Guard, and technically it is the state’s military, not the federal military. The National Guard can be called by the Governor of the State, or by the President of the United States. … National Guard troops are dual enrolled in the state military and the federal military as reserves …”.
Respectfully, Supposing
Lies, lies and misinformation! The "riot' started while Trump was still at the White House. During his speech he urged the people to protest peacefully at the Capitol. After he knew of the riot, how do you (or anyone else for that matter) propose that he should have stopped it?
... Newsflash: There is no state police in DC, because it is not ... wait for it, a state! ,,,
Admiral Rockwell Tory, there were no state's or federal national guard units prior to much later, because the White House and the president did not, after the riot had begun, wish them to be there then. But it would have been to his greater embarrassment if the rioters were permitted to continue beyond the later hours of January sixth. Respectfully, Supposing
How did Trump do that, [i.e. let it be known that he was encouraging his follower to act uncivilly or illegally] ? Did he send them a note, email, personal phone call, fax, etc.?
They pleaded with what the prosecution wanted them to say. There have been zero charges of insurrection.
Admiral Rockwell Tory, the White House is extremely well informed. If the president's associate within or outside of the White House do not inform him of anything, it's updated information deliberately being kept from him.
That could be be due to those in the White House conspiring against the president, but more likely it's due to his associates being aware of the president not desiring to do or have any action done on his administration's behalf with regard to the situation. President Trump did not actually wish to halt or reduce the extent of the riot, but after waiting until the afternoon when he addressed a crowd, it would have been an embarrassment for him not to say rioters should disperse. Trump's motive was to not leave his fingerprints where the rioters touched anything. Respectfully, Supposn
