The Hearings

Sarcasm Alert!!!


OK, I'm convinced!!! Let's start this "new rules" by gunning down every single person that shows up in front of the house of a judge. After all, they are breaking federal law, it's just that the coward Merrick Garland won't do anything about it.


Did you hear that there are people on the internet discussing where Amy Coney Barrett's children go to school so that they can go there and threaten children? You sick fucks!!!!

And you would be the one in prison, rightfully so. Thankfully for everyone, you’d never pass a psych eval to hold a position of any authority. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

You do REALIZE there is a difference in bashing the window of a dollar tree and stealing shit than literally storming the Capitol, breaching police lines, beating police, (show me one time THIS happened during all the BLM shit y'all talk), attempting to hang the Vice President of the country and smearing (literal) shit on the walls of the Capitol?



If not, and your zero hero does happen to win again in 24, you have to admit the same would be acceptable when directed at him. I refuse to believe you're that stupid so convince me.

Sarcasm Alert!!!


OK, I'm convinced!!! Let's start this "new rules" by gunning down every single person that shows up in front of the house of a judge. After all, they are breaking federal law, it's just that the coward Merrick Garland won't do anything about it.


Did you hear that there are people on the internet discussing where Amy Coney Barrett's children go to school so that they can go there and threaten children? You sick fucks!!!! Originally Posted by HedonistForever

I'll bite, sarcasm is a second language. Can you show me where it's against federal law to show up IN FRONT of the house of a judge? How do they get mail? Uber eats? Amazon must be in real trouble...

You do REALIZE there is a difference in bashing the window of a dollar tree and stealing shit than literally storming the Capitol, breaching police lines, beating police, (show me one time THIS happened during all the BLM shit y'all talk), attempting to hang the Vice President of the country and smearing (literal) shit on the walls of the Capitol?



If not, and your zero hero does happen to win again in 24, you have to admit the same would be acceptable when directed at him. I refuse to believe you're that stupid so convince me. Originally Posted by 69in2it69

okay.


SPD: Rioters tried to trap officers inside burning precinct using rebar and concrete

https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/spd...C6CLW3PEKKAEE/


Portland protesters breach fence around federal courthouse

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...03b_story.html


thank you valued poster

okay.


SPD: Rioters tried to trap officers inside burning precinct using rebar and concrete

https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/spd...C6CLW3PEKKAEE/


Portland protesters breach fence around federal courthouse

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...03b_story.html


thank you valued poster Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Thank you for the links, I read them.


"We're being held hostage by a group of 100 to 150 people that are bent on destroying this city and hurting police officers," Solan said.



How do you think Jan. 6 would have went down if it'd only been 100-150?


"I think what this shows you is that these people are intent on killing police officers," said Mike Solan, president of the Seattle Police Guild, who called the act '"clear domestic terrorism.'"




So your definition of domestic terrorism is "fluid"? Or am I missing something?



I'm all for equal justice, you won't hear me defend those people anymore than I will the Jan. 6 mob.

I'd suggest Donald Trump himself and Adam Schiff do the play-by-play. They're both pretty good showmen. The ratings would be through the ceiling. Originally Posted by Tiny

Well Adam Schiff was once a script writer for the Entertainment Industry before he became a Politician. So now he's using his writing talents for the Political realm. I think Adam helped write the Russian Collusion Hoax among other things.

... We KNOW he helped with the "Hunter laptop is Fake" lie.
Even had 41 past and present members of the Intelligence
community agree with him...

Schiff surely got more lies than Biden and Hillary put together.

And the liberal lads here support all those lies.
We see it everyday.

### Salty

You do REALIZE there is a difference in bashing the window of a dollar tree and stealing shit than literally storming the Capitol, breaching police lines, beating police, (show me one time THIS happened during all the BLM shit y'all talk) Originally Posted by 69in2it69

You have a conveniently short memory like most leftards.

More than 60 Secret Service officers and agents were injured near the White House this weekend

The officers and agents were injured when protesters threw “projectiles such as bricks, rocks, bottles, fireworks and other items,” according to the statement. “Personnel were also directly physically assaulted as they were kicked, punched and exposed to bodily fluids.”

I'll bite, sarcasm is a second language. Can you show me where it's against federal law to show up IN FRONT of the house of a judge? Originally Posted by 69in2it69

18 U.S. Code § 1503 - Influencing or injuring officer or juror

(a) Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede any grand or petit juror, or officer in or of any court of the United States, or officer who may be serving at any examination or other proceeding before any United States magistrate judge or other committing magistrate, in the discharge of his duty, or injures any such grand or petit juror in his person or property on account of any verdict or indictment assented to by him, or on account of his being or having been such juror, or injures any such officer, magistrate judge, or other committing magistrate in his person or property on account of the performance of his official duties, or corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b). If the offense under this section occurs in connection with a trial of a criminal case, and the act in violation of this section involves the threat of physical force or physical force, the maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for the offense shall be the higher of that otherwise provided by law or the maximum term that could have been imposed for any offense charged in such case.

18 U.S. Code § 1503 - Influencing or injuring officer or juror

(a) Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede any grand or petit juror, or officer in or of any court of the United States, or officer who may be serving at any examination or other proceeding before any United States magistrate judge or other committing magistrate, in the discharge of his duty, or injures any such grand or petit juror in his person or property on account of any verdict or indictment assented to by him, or on account of his being or having been such juror, or injures any such officer, magistrate judge, or other committing magistrate in his person or property on account of the performance of his official duties, or corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b). If the offense under this section occurs in connection with a trial of a criminal case, and the act in violation of this section involves the threat of physical force or physical force, the maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for the offense shall be the higher of that otherwise provided by law or the maximum term that could have been imposed for any offense charged in such case. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Here's the takeaway: by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication

Without a threat of force, or threatening communication, NADA.

If 100 people screaming and picketing at the end of his driveway isn’t an “endeavor to influence“, what is it?

Sorry dude, they’re clearly breaking the law. If we follow Chung’s thinking, Cavanaugh could come outside and shoot them.

So all the people in front of the Capitol on Jan 6 2020 were definitely breaking the law. Not just the ones that broke inside, but all the ones that were outside trying to itimidate the members of congress. ya know, if screaming and picketing is all that is required to be an endeavor to influence.

18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2).

(c) Whoever corruptly—

(2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.


I take it you believe they should be getting their 20 years, they did stop the proceedings for a time by forcing an evacuation. And they tried to fully impede the VP and congress from officially recognizing the electoral count.

Trump as well, right.

Lock him up
Lock him up
Lock him up

Redress of grievances to a governing body goes back to the Magna Carta, targeted harassment of individuals does not.

Here's the takeaway: by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication

Without a threat of force, or threatening communication, NADA. Originally Posted by 69in2it69

When Chuck Shumer called out Kavanaugh by name and said that if he didn't vote the way Schumer wanted him to vote, "he would pay the price". Now to me, that sounds like a threat. Does it sound like a threat to you? And when a man with a gun shows up at Kavanaugh's house saying he intends to kill Kavanaugh, can a reasonable person assume that the crazy guy was "motivated" by Schumer's words? I ask because the Jan. 6th committee is saying that Trump's words "motivated the crowd". Equal Justice under the law. If Trump's words "motivated" so did Shumers. Either charge them both or neither.


My problem with your "here's the take away", is that it isn't my take away. My take away is

endeavors to influence, intimidate,

This is similar to the 2nd amendment argument when some want to concentrate on the "well regulated militia" when others concentrate on the right to bare arms that shall not be infringed upon.