Should these persons be in jail and paying tens of thousands in fines and have criminal records?

I support the release of innocent protestors, not looters or rioters

 

that is the way the system works, if one expresses they have remorse, they may get a lighter sentence, but if they publicly show no remorse, they get harsher sentences

 

And should she go to prison and if so why?

And BTW


Oral Argument In J6 SCOTUS Case Lays Bare DOJ’s Partisan Lawfare


....Prelogar’s argument to the court seemed to serve a dual purpose: to placate the court’s concerns that the government’s reading of Section 1512(c)(2) is overbroad and to convince the justices that the DOJ applies the statute uniformly.

Judging by the questions and responses from the bench, a majority of the justices remained unconvinced — as they should be. Far from establishing that the DOJ enforces Section 1512(c)(2) uniformly, the solicitor general’s argument painted a picture of the Biden administration enlarging or contracting the statutory language to serve political purposes.

From Tuesday’s argument, it appears unlikely a majority of the court will acquiesce in the Biden administration’s reading of Section 1512(c)(2) as creating an independent obstruction of official proceedings felony. Rather, the questioning from a majority of the justices suggests the Supreme Court will hold that subsection (2) only criminalizes conduct that impairs evidence for use in an official proceeding — which is the better reading of the statute."
https://thefederalist.com/2024/04/1...-scotus-case-lays-bare-dojs-partisan-lawfare/

 

Kamala made no distinctions did you support her raising money to get them out of jail so THEY COULD CONTINUE?

 

So she should fake it and say she in fact was a rioter and looter and she is remorseful now? That is how justice is supposed to work?

 

I would not support the release of looters and rioters as I said, only peaceful protestors... from either side

 

she is guilty of the crimes she did, that is what she should show remorse for, if you show no remorse, you're likely to recommit the crime, thus more time

 

Dude the FBI had been trying to arrest Trump supporters who weren't even in DC and a lot who never got anywhere close to the capitol itself.

 

if they were involved.... give name of those with zero involvement that were arrested

 

I'm glad you finally agree that:

Granny received due process.
She got her day in court.
There was no fault in the process.

Progress.

Her sentence will follow the guidelines established for her crime(s). If that includes prison time. so be it.

As for the Oral argument excerpt quoted, that's all it is, a small excerpt with a comment added by a rightie source ( I see you chose The Federalist as your source, hardly an objective organization). What remains , after all the deflection and diversion, is still that fact that Trump's mob violently broke into the Capitol and interrupted a session of Congress engaged in one of it's most important responsibilities.

What crimes do you think should have been charged and prosecuted ?
What do you think granny and the other insurrectionists deserve ?

In all your posts, you haven't even suggested an alternative.

 

An absurd formulation on the whole. The court is about to see to it that almost all the J6 defendants who engages in no violence which is a lot of them are about to go home with time served and a 100 dollar fine for trespassing if scotus rules as they should in this case.

 

"As they should" ? Or , as a Trump supporter and rightie, as you want them to ?

We will see. Either way, I'm will be, mostly, satisfied with the outcome.

 

As they should. Ten minute walk through an open door and a bit of prayer time should not net you 19 months and 75k fine.

 

There is no question you folks have a specious whataboutism for everything.

 

I beg to differ. Adults are responsible for their actions, even Trump supporters. If the defense is stupidity or being oblivious to what was going on, that should have been raised at trial.

 

Not a better reading, an ideologically based reading by the conservatives consistent with ruling in favor of Trump and the insurrectionists as is their want. Especially considering His Orangeness is charged under Section 1512(c)(2).

Prelogar's argument being the statute gives prosecutors appropriate discretion based on the severity and intent of the obstruction being considered. She also pointed out while the statute allows for a sentence up to 20 years, most defendants charged under it were sentenced to less than 2 years.

 

Yes you are responsible for you actions. However the penalty in this case for the particular infraction is so wildly over the top that excessive fines as specified in the constitution seems to be in play. You are in essence asking for the death penalty for jay walking.

 

Hardly. Insurrection, however, is a very serious crime and even those peripherally involved need to suffer consequences. Again, that needs to be argued in court.

 

I trust in America's justice system, and recognize that there are perps who will lie and distort to escape justice, and partisans who will parrot their lies and distortions, pretending, with no evidence, that any administration is involved in those prosecutions and convictions. Paranoia concerning public-minded citizens who serve on juries undercuts the integrity of the nations institutions.

Savaging the United States, its certified elections, its enforcement of law and order, and its judicial system and those who serve the public are not legitimates reactions to losing.

Social media is not the venue in which to critique verdicts. Appeals should be filed when a convicted person questions the verdict.

A 12-member jury found Lavrenz guilty of entering and remaining in a restricted building, disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds, disorderly conduct in a capitol building, and parading, demonstrating or picketing in a capitol...

Of the 64 cases brought forward by former President Donald Trump and his supporters challenging the 2020 results, they prevailed in one lawsuit in Pennsylvania, which did not include enough votes to overturn the result.

In the 63 other cases, 20 were dismissed before a hearing on the merits, 14 were voluntarily dismissed and 30 included a hearing on the merits.

“Multiple tipsters alerted the FBI” in the days following Jan. 6, 2021, that Lavrenz was among the crowd who entered the Capitol, according to court documents, and FBI agents confirmed her presence on the site by tracing her cell phone and identifying her in video footage.
​

Not all who participated in the insurrection incited by the sexual abuser are incapable of accepting justice, of course:

Pam Hemphill, a 69-year-old woman convicted for participating in the Capitol riot, has told Trump to stop using her story for his political purposes.

Mr Trump commented "HORRIBLE" on his Truth Social account in response to a post claiming the grandmother would have to spend more time in jail than Hunter Biden, who accepted a plea deal relating to a years-long investigation into his taxes.

Hemphill responded to Mr Trump's comments on Twitter, calling for him to stop using her story to boost his agenda.

"Please @realDonaldTrump don’t be using me for anything, I’m not a victim of Jan6, I pleaded guilty because I was guilty! #StopTheSpin," she wrote on the platform.

Hemphill pushed past police lines three times during the Capitol riot, and encouraged others to push into the Capitol. She was later spotted inside the Capitol rotunda.​

 

I will hold you to that then....be prepared.

Once again should she go to prison and pay a huge fine for PEACEFUL behavior under the supervision and direction of the Capitol Police?

​

This is not about cases Trump brought.

​

This is not about Hemphill asking Trump anything.

​

 

Nope it is actually a reading as intended and has the precedent of what little it has ever been used.

Did you not listen to the oral arguments before the SCOTUS. It is the reading, the EXPANSIVE and totally UNIQUE NEW reading the DOJ is trying to apply and for which Prelogar had no clear explanation other than it's whatever they say it is.

And why do you keep referring to them as insurrectionist when no was has charged let alone convicted?

 

We are discussing how such protester/rioters are treated. On topic but can understand how you would have no response in defense of her supporting them vis-a-vis the Jan 6 protester/rioters.

 

The irony, your bluster almost matches Trumps.

Does due process include equal treatment under the law?
Never said she did go to court. The question is should she have been there in the first place.
No technical fault? Never said there was no technical fault in the process.

Does it REQUIRE prison, does it REQUIRE a fine. Do you believe she should receive both for her peaceful, throw the doors being held open to her by the Cap Police, under the supervision of the Cap Police for the entire TEN MINUTES as she peacefully walked through and out the other side.

To which your refuse to respond
What crimes do you think should have been charged and prosecuted ?
What do you think granny and the other insurrectionists deserve ?

In all your posts, you haven't even suggested an alternative.[/QUOTE]

I don't see where she violated the law and if she did it was entrapment.

30 days probation.

 

​

Pam Hemphill, a Jan. 6 rioter who served her sentence for her role in the insurrection, offers her views on Trump's indictment in connection with attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

What Trump experienced in court yesterday is what many January 6 rioters have already faced...

"Nobody wants to see a president go to prison. However, it's time that we recognize that law and order is for everyone."
"I pleaded guilty because I was guilty - trespassing, picketing and parading. We broke the law, period."

"I want the world to know that I followed a cult leader, and I'm really sorry that I did because I'm really ashamed of it. But it's something I got to forgive myself. But I can't blame me 100% because I was lied to by Trump."

https://www.npr.org/2023/08/04/1192...-the-same-fate-as-those-who-stormed-the-capit​

 

Cheerleaders who bray against jury verdicts did not hear the presentation to the jury of evidence and sworn testimony, nor the defense's attempt to discredit both.

Second-guessing juries is uninformed, as well as biased.