So you want to label the DC protest treason insurrection or rebellion.

[9thIDdoc]

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Sedition is a serious felony punishable by fines and up to 20 years in prison and it refers to the act of inciting revolt or violence against a lawful authority with the goal of destroying or overthrowing it

According to Merriam-Webster, "insurrection" is the "act of revolting against civil authority or an established government." Other definitions, like that of the Cambridge Dictionary, specify the act is usually a violent one. Synonyms include "revolt" or "uprising," according to Merriam-Webster.

The DC protest was not an act of rebellion or war. Trespass they may have been guilty of but so would most of the of the people who attended protests the last couple of years. The antifa azzwipes who captured and held part of Portland should have been tried for sedition and/or insurrection but weren't. Why not? And why the apparent double standard?

Wrong!

The attack on the Capitol was intended to stop the lawful certification of the Presidency. It was intended to undermine Democracy. It was both sedition and an insurrection.

And you know all of this because...? More importantly what evidence do you think can be presented in court to prove beyond a reasonable doubt those charges? Americans have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of their peers. At least for the moment. We would like to retain that right which is why they were there.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Obviously, Fox News, and News Max, and OAN etc, are not showing right wingers what the rioters and domestic terrorists did while defilng the capitol and congress, 24/7 as they did with the blm rioting.


CHANTING


HANG MIKE PENCE
HANG MIKE PENCE
HANG MIKE PENCE

What does it matter what they were chanting? Free speech is free speech. The Congress had already defiled themselves and the capitol long before the protestors ever got there so they have no complaint coming.

 

[Rye Catcher]

Q. So you want to label the DC protest treason insurrection or rebellion.

A. Absolutely. Treason is the high bar, but it seems that insurrection (defined in 18 US code 2383) as, "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.

This sections includes all of those who entered the Capitol Building on Jan 6th, 2021 and are now either in custody or their photographs will be in Post Offices all across America before the end of winter.

It also includes Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Jr. and Eric Trump; Rudy and others who are elected officials.

That also describes CHAZ.

What do you mean in posting; "That also describes CHAZ."

 

[Rye Catcher]

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Sedition is a serious felony punishable by fines and up to 20 years in prison and it refers to the act of inciting revolt or violence against a lawful authority with the goal of destroying or overthrowing it

According to Merriam-Webster, "insurrection" is the "act of revolting against civil authority or an established government." Other definitions, like that of the Cambridge Dictionary, specify the act is usually a violent one. Synonyms include "revolt" or "uprising," according to Merriam-Webster.

The DC protest was not an act of rebellion or war. Trespass they may have been guilty of but so would most of the of the people who attended protests the last couple of years. The antifa azzwipes who captured and held part of Portland should have been tried for sedition and/or insurrection but weren't. Why not? And why the apparent double standard?

Wrong!

The attack on the Capitol was intended to stop the lawful certification of the Presidency. It was intended to undermine Democracy. It was both sedition and an insurrection.

And you know all of this because...? More importantly what evidence do you think can be presented in court to prove beyond a reasonable doubt those charges? Americans have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of their peers. At least for the moment. We would like to retain that right which is why they were there.

The evidence to support sedition as well as insurrection has been broadcast on TV. That is prima facie evidence which has no defense. Maybe you need to read very closely the US Code, the elements for both the former (sedition) and the latter (insurrection); in some cases, treason, which may be more difficult to prove, but is not to be ignored.

 

[Rye Catcher]

Obviously, Fox News, and News Max, and OAN etc, are not showing right wingers what the rioters and domestic terrorists did while defilng the capitol and congress, 24/7 as they did with the blm rioting.


CHANTING


HANG MIKE PENCE
HANG MIKE PENCE
HANG MIKE PENCE

What does it matter what they were chanting? Free speech is free speech. The Congress had already defiled themselves and the capitol long before the protestors ever got there so they have no complaint coming.

(5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that—

(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;​

(B) appear to be intended—​

(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;​

(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or​

(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and​

(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States;​

18 U.S. Code § 2331 - Definitions

www.law.cornell.edu

Seems chanting to incite a hanging of a sitting Vice President of the United States is clear and convincing that the thugs chanting this threat are domestic terrorists.

 

[9thIDdoc]

I think we should label it the same way we label the BLM and ANTIFA actions.

Precious few here are honest enough to do so.

Those rioters are just criminal dirt bags, not traitorous dirt bags, but should be prosecuted also.

Those "rioters" are taxpaying generally law abidding citizens fed up with our corrupt congress----------

They may have been "taxpaying generally law abiding citizens" but now, by their own actions, are seditious traitors.

So prove it.

 

[hadit]

Q. So you want to label the DC protest treason insurrection or rebellion.

A. Absolutely. Treason is the high bar, but it seems that insurrection (defined in 18 US code 2383) as, "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.

This sections includes all of those who entered the Capitol Building on Jan 6th, 2021 and are now either in custody or their photographs will be in Post Offices all across America before the end of winter.

It also includes Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Jr. and Eric Trump; Rudy and others who are elected officials.

That also describes CHAZ.

What do you mean in posting; "That also describes CHAZ."

CHAZ was a rebellion against the authority of the laws of the United States.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Sedition is a serious felony punishable by fines and up to 20 years in prison and it refers to the act of inciting revolt or violence against a lawful authority with the goal of destroying or overthrowing it

According to Merriam-Webster, "insurrection" is the "act of revolting against civil authority or an established government." Other definitions, like that of the Cambridge Dictionary, specify the act is usually a violent one. Synonyms include "revolt" or "uprising," according to Merriam-Webster.

The DC protest was not an act of rebellion or war. Trespass they may have been guilty of but so would most of the of the people who attended protests the last couple of years. The antifa azzwipes who captured and held part of Portland should have been tried for sedition and/or insurrection but weren't. Why not? And why the apparent double standard?

Wrong!

The attack on the Capitol was intended to stop the lawful certification of the Presidency. It was intended to undermine Democracy. It was both sedition and an insurrection.

And you know all of this because...? More importantly what evidence do you think can be presented in court to prove beyond a reasonable doubt those charges? Americans have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of their peers. At least for the moment. We would like to retain that right which is why they were there.

The evidence to support sedition as well as insurrection has been broadcast on TV. That is prima facie evidence which has no defense. Maybe you need to read very closely the US Code, the elements for both the former (sedition) and the latter (insurrection); in some cases, treason, which may be more difficult to prove, but is not to be ignored.

I've seen TV and have seen no evidence of what you claim. You are begging the question which probably indicates that you have simply jumped to an unprovable conclusion. Care to try again? Or is this an admission you have no clue what you're talking about?

 

[White 6]

I think we should label it the same way we label the BLM and ANTIFA actions.

Precious few here are honest enough to do so.

Those rioters are just criminal dirt bags, not traitorous dirt bags, but should be prosecuted also.

Those "rioters" are taxpaying generally law abidding citizens fed up with our corrupt congress----------

They may have been "taxpaying generally law abiding citizens" but now, by their own actions, are seditious traitors.

So prove it.

Look around. It was live on every channel. We saw them inside. Saw them attacking police and federal security. It will be used in court. It is proven.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Obviously, Fox News, and News Max, and OAN etc, are not showing right wingers what the rioters and domestic terrorists did while defilng the capitol and congress, 24/7 as they did with the blm rioting.


CHANTING


HANG MIKE PENCE
HANG MIKE PENCE
HANG MIKE PENCE

What does it matter what they were chanting? Free speech is free speech. The Congress had already defiled themselves and the capitol long before the protestors ever got there so they have no complaint coming.

(5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that—

(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;​

(B) appear to be intended—​

(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;​

(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or​

(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and​

(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States;​

18 U.S. Code § 2331 - Definitions

www.law.cornell.edu

Seems chanting to incite a hanging of a sitting Vice President of the United States is clear and convincing that the thugs chanting this threat are domestic terrorists.

Chanting by demonstrators has been ruled by the Supreme Court to be free speech and protected by the first amendment. I have lived through the anti-war movement the civil rights movement and assorted race riots and I know of no exceptions. The most vile acts imaginable have been ruled "free speech" and that is not likely to change just because you don't like what the demonstration is about. I seriously doubt you could find a lawyer that would even attempt to argue your conclusion in court. Even if you could and it was accepted as a valid argument it would still be up to you to prove exactly which individuals were involved. Can you?
One member from the demonstrators and one member of the capitol police have been identified whose actions might fit in your category (A). Intent remains unproven for both. The burden of proof is required by the prosecutor.

 

[9thIDdoc]

I think we should label it the same way we label the BLM and ANTIFA actions.

Precious few here are honest enough to do so.

Those rioters are just criminal dirt bags, not traitorous dirt bags, but should be prosecuted also.

Those "rioters" are taxpaying generally law abidding citizens fed up with our corrupt congress----------

They may have been "taxpaying generally law abiding citizens" but now, by their own actions, are seditious traitors.

So prove it.

Look around. It was live on every channel. We saw them inside. Saw them attacking police and federal security. It will be used in court. It is proven.

Nothing is proven until it is proven in court. If video shows them there that would be evidence they were there and could probably be found guilty of trespassing. Assault is certainly a crime and there might be some individuals that may be proven they were guilty that. That is a very long way from proving treason or insurrection or rebellion.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

When the smoke clears on the coming war with American communist shit twinkle-toed cocksuckers, the history books will deem it a war of patriots fighting off tyrants attempting to overthrow the constitutional republic.

 

[9thIDdoc]

It’s not a matter of ‘want.’

It is a fact – settled, accepted, and beyond dispute – that the Trump-incited attack on America’s democracy was both treasonous insurrection and lawless rebellion.

It is fact-settled, accepted and beyond dispute that your statement is pure bullshit.

 

[Rye Catcher]

Q. So you want to label the DC protest treason insurrection or rebellion.

A. Absolutely. Treason is the high bar, but it seems that insurrection (defined in 18 US code 2383) as, "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.

This sections includes all of those who entered the Capitol Building on Jan 6th, 2021 and are now either in custody or their photographs will be in Post Offices all across America before the end of winter.

It also includes Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Jr. and Eric Trump; Rudy and others who are elected officials.

That also describes CHAZ.

What do you mean in posting; "That also describes CHAZ."

CHAZ was a rebellion against the authority of the laws of the United States.

Thank you. In short an anarchist.

 

[Rye Catcher]

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Sedition is a serious felony punishable by fines and up to 20 years in prison and it refers to the act of inciting revolt or violence against a lawful authority with the goal of destroying or overthrowing it

According to Merriam-Webster, "insurrection" is the "act of revolting against civil authority or an established government." Other definitions, like that of the Cambridge Dictionary, specify the act is usually a violent one. Synonyms include "revolt" or "uprising," according to Merriam-Webster.

The DC protest was not an act of rebellion or war. Trespass they may have been guilty of but so would most of the of the people who attended protests the last couple of years. The antifa azzwipes who captured and held part of Portland should have been tried for sedition and/or insurrection but weren't. Why not? And why the apparent double standard?

Wrong!

The attack on the Capitol was intended to stop the lawful certification of the Presidency. It was intended to undermine Democracy. It was both sedition and an insurrection.

And you know all of this because...? More importantly what evidence do you think can be presented in court to prove beyond a reasonable doubt those charges? Americans have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of their peers. At least for the moment. We would like to retain that right which is why they were there.

The evidence to support sedition as well as insurrection has been broadcast on TV. That is prima facie evidence which has no defense. Maybe you need to read very closely the US Code, the elements for both the former (sedition) and the latter (insurrection); in some cases, treason, which may be more difficult to prove, but is not to be ignored.

I've seen TV and have seen no evidence of what you claim. You are begging the question which probably indicates that you have simply jumped to an unprovable conclusion. Care to try again? Or is this an admission you have no clue what you're talking about?

What you have seen on TV was a riot by a mob. Period, end of debate.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Sedition is a serious felony punishable by fines and up to 20 years in prison and it refers to the act of inciting revolt or violence against a lawful authority with the goal of destroying or overthrowing it

According to Merriam-Webster, "insurrection" is the "act of revolting against civil authority or an established government." Other definitions, like that of the Cambridge Dictionary, specify the act is usually a violent one. Synonyms include "revolt" or "uprising," according to Merriam-Webster.

The DC protest was not an act of rebellion or war. Trespass they may have been guilty of but so would most of the of the people who attended protests the last couple of years. The antifa azzwipes who captured and held part of Portland should have been tried for sedition and/or insurrection but weren't. Why not? And why the apparent double standard?

Wrong!

The attack on the Capitol was intended to stop the lawful certification of the Presidency. It was intended to undermine Democracy. It was both sedition and an insurrection.

And you know all of this because...? More importantly what evidence do you think can be presented in court to prove beyond a reasonable doubt those charges? Americans have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of their peers. At least for the moment. We would like to retain that right which is why they were there.

The evidence to support sedition as well as insurrection has been broadcast on TV. That is prima facie evidence which has no defense. Maybe you need to read very closely the US Code, the elements for both the former (sedition) and the latter (insurrection); in some cases, treason, which may be more difficult to prove, but is not to be ignored.

I've seen TV and have seen no evidence of what you claim. You are begging the question which probably indicates that you have simply jumped to an unprovable conclusion. Care to try again? Or is this an admission you have no clue what you're talking about?

What you have seen on TV was a riot by a mob. Period, end of debate.

So? Did you think the left had some kind of monopoly on riot by mob? The left has been seriously into it for almost 60 years now and maybe the worm has turned. Maybe it's time for the right to get in on all the fun and games. Maybe it's time for the left to (literally) pass the torch and watch the right burn buildings and vehicles and loot stores for awhile. Maybe it's time to step aside and learn what real violence looks like. I'm afraid you won't like it much but thank you so much for putting the cops in check and turning so many local and State leaders into timid permissive pussies.
Oh-in case you missed it-riot by mob is not treason or insurrection or rebellion. You guys have turned into an American tradition. Thanks again.

 

[Rye Catcher]

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Sedition is a serious felony punishable by fines and up to 20 years in prison and it refers to the act of inciting revolt or violence against a lawful authority with the goal of destroying or overthrowing it

According to Merriam-Webster, "insurrection" is the "act of revolting against civil authority or an established government." Other definitions, like that of the Cambridge Dictionary, specify the act is usually a violent one. Synonyms include "revolt" or "uprising," according to Merriam-Webster.

The DC protest was not an act of rebellion or war. Trespass they may have been guilty of but so would most of the of the people who attended protests the last couple of years. The antifa azzwipes who captured and held part of Portland should have been tried for sedition and/or insurrection but weren't. Why not? And why the apparent double standard?

Wrong!

The attack on the Capitol was intended to stop the lawful certification of the Presidency. It was intended to undermine Democracy. It was both sedition and an insurrection.

And you know all of this because...? More importantly what evidence do you think can be presented in court to prove beyond a reasonable doubt those charges? Americans have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of their peers. At least for the moment. We would like to retain that right which is why they were there.

The evidence to support sedition as well as insurrection has been broadcast on TV. That is prima facie evidence which has no defense. Maybe you need to read very closely the US Code, the elements for both the former (sedition) and the latter (insurrection); in some cases, treason, which may be more difficult to prove, but is not to be ignored.

I've seen TV and have seen no evidence of what you claim. You are begging the question which probably indicates that you have simply jumped to an unprovable conclusion. Care to try again? Or is this an admission you have no clue what you're talking about?

What you have seen on TV was a riot by a mob. Period, end of debate.

So? Did you think the left had some kind of monopoly on riot by mob? The left has been seriously into it for almost 60 years now and maybe the worm has turned. Maybe it's time for the right to get in on all the fun and games. Maybe it's time for the left to (literally) pass the torch and watch the right burn buildings and vehicles and loot stores for awhile. Maybe it's time to step aside and learn what real violence looks like. I'm afraid you won't like it much but thank you so much for putting the cops in check and turning so many local and State leaders into timid permissive pussies.
Oh-in case you missed it-riot by mob is not treason or insurrection or rebellion. You guys have turned into an American tradition. Thanks again.

LOL, I spent a career (32 years) as a deputy, supervisor, manager and director in Law Enforcement. You have no clue about our COTUS, or other laws and civil disobedience.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Really? I don't believe a word of it. I was in the Army in training in San Francisco in 1969 just prior to deployment to Vietnam. I know far more than I would like about what left wing scumbag rioters can, do, and have gotten away with in the name of free speech and protest.

 

[Rigby5]

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Sedition is a serious felony punishable by fines and up to 20 years in prison and it refers to the act of inciting revolt or violence against a lawful authority with the goal of destroying or overthrowing it

According to Merriam-Webster, "insurrection" is the "act of revolting against civil authority or an established government." Other definitions, like that of the Cambridge Dictionary, specify the act is usually a violent one. Synonyms include "revolt" or "uprising," according to Merriam-Webster.

The DC protest was not an act of rebellion or war. Trespass they may have been guilty of but so would most of the of the people who attended protests the last couple of years. The antifa azzwipes who captured and held part of Portland should have been tried for sedition and/or insurrection but weren't. Why not? And why the apparent double standard?

Wrong!

The attack on the Capitol was intended to stop the lawful certification of the Presidency. It was intended to undermine Democracy. It was both sedition and an insurrection.

And you know all of this because...? More importantly what evidence do you think can be presented in court to prove beyond a reasonable doubt those charges? Americans have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of their peers. At least for the moment. We would like to retain that right which is why they were there.

The evidence to support sedition as well as insurrection has been broadcast on TV. That is prima facie evidence which has no defense. Maybe you need to read very closely the US Code, the elements for both the former (sedition) and the latter (insurrection); in some cases, treason, which may be more difficult to prove, but is not to be ignored.

Ridiculous nonsense.

First of all, sedition and insurrection are both dependent upon armed rebellion, of which there was NONE!

Second and even MORE important is that the charge is incredibly stupid. If you back people into a corner, you WILL force sedition and insurrection, and it will be not only warranted, but YOUR fault.

Since the occupation of Congress was entirely for the purposes of political expression, it is one of the most democratic things that as happened in decades. Especially compared with the dictatorial crimes of Congress, like lying about WMD in Iraq, illegally invading Afghanistan, murdering Qaddafi, setting up a dictatorship in Egypt, trying to murder Assad, the illegal War on Drug, illegal 3 Strikes legislation, illegal federal gun control, failure to provide public health care, etc.
If this were really the democratic republic is should be, Congress would already be hanged for its treason.

 

[Rigby5]

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Sedition is a serious felony punishable by fines and up to 20 years in prison and it refers to the act of inciting revolt or violence against a lawful authority with the goal of destroying or overthrowing it

According to Merriam-Webster, "insurrection" is the "act of revolting against civil authority or an established government." Other definitions, like that of the Cambridge Dictionary, specify the act is usually a violent one. Synonyms include "revolt" or "uprising," according to Merriam-Webster.

The DC protest was not an act of rebellion or war. Trespass they may have been guilty of but so would most of the of the people who attended protests the last couple of years. The antifa azzwipes who captured and held part of Portland should have been tried for sedition and/or insurrection but weren't. Why not? And why the apparent double standard?

Wrong!

The attack on the Capitol was intended to stop the lawful certification of the Presidency. It was intended to undermine Democracy. It was both sedition and an insurrection.

And you know all of this because...? More importantly what evidence do you think can be presented in court to prove beyond a reasonable doubt those charges? Americans have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of their peers. At least for the moment. We would like to retain that right which is why they were there.

The evidence to support sedition as well as insurrection has been broadcast on TV. That is prima facie evidence which has no defense. Maybe you need to read very closely the US Code, the elements for both the former (sedition) and the latter (insurrection); in some cases, treason, which may be more difficult to prove, but is not to be ignored.

I've seen TV and have seen no evidence of what you claim. You are begging the question which probably indicates that you have simply jumped to an unprovable conclusion. Care to try again? Or is this an admission you have no clue what you're talking about?

What you have seen on TV was a riot by a mob. Period, end of debate.

So? Did you think the left had some kind of monopoly on riot by mob? The left has been seriously into it for almost 60 years now and maybe the worm has turned. Maybe it's time for the right to get in on all the fun and games. Maybe it's time for the left to (literally) pass the torch and watch the right burn buildings and vehicles and loot stores for awhile. Maybe it's time to step aside and learn what real violence looks like. I'm afraid you won't like it much but thank you so much for putting the cops in check and turning so many local and State leaders into timid permissive pussies.
Oh-in case you missed it-riot by mob is not treason or insurrection or rebellion. You guys have turned into an American tradition. Thanks again.

LOL, I spent a career (32 years) as a deputy, supervisor, manager and director in Law Enforcement. You have no clue about our COTUS, or other laws and civil disobedience.

That makes you the LEAST qualified, since LEOs have been out of control dictators ever since Prohibition, which was totally illegal. Anyone who actually understands law, knows that legislation is only legal when it is necessary in order to protect the rights of individuals. But nanny laws like Prohibition and the War on Drugs, defend the rights of no one. They are arbitrary infringements of a government gone rogue. Only a dictatorship could support such nonsense.
And yet in your 32 years, you did nothing about such obvious crimes by government.