LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

Oathkeeper Indicted for Jan 6 - Seditious Conspiracy

working their way up, little fishies to the bigger ones, on their way to the biggest ones in the pond
 
butters said:
working their way up, little fishies to the bigger ones, on their way to the biggest ones in the pond
Click to expand...

Yep. If this is.a little one, we're going to see some serious charges
 
ll74 said:
Yep. If this is.a little one, we're going to see some serious charges
Click to expand...
the littlest are those 700+ already indicted; this one is a slightly bigger one but still small fry by comparison to what we can (hopefully) expect.
 
Will this shut up the RWs who keep protesting that 1/6 was no "insurrection" because nobody has been charged with insurrection? "Seditious conspiracy" sounds like a very similar charge.
 
pecksniff said:
Will this shut up the RWs who keep protesting that 1/6 was no "insurrection" because nobody has been charged with insurrection? "Seditious conspiracy" sounds like a very similar charge.
Click to expand...

This charge doesn't have anything to do with an attempt to overthrow the government.
 
pecksniff said:
That's what "seditious conspiracy" is.
Click to expand...

The governing statute mentions that, but the DoJ is pursuing them under a different clause, "by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States..."
 
Bud_Spencer said:
This charge doesn't have anything to do with an attempt to overthrow the government.
Click to expand...

And so how would you characterize "oppose by force"?
The seditious conspiracy indictment alleges that, following the Nov. 3, 2020, presidential election, Rhodes conspired with his co-defendants and others to oppose by force the execution of the laws governing the transfer of presidential power by Jan. 20, 2021," DOJ wrote in a release.
Click to expand...
 
ll74 said:
And so how would you characterize "oppose by force"?
Click to expand...

Read the statute. There are a number of things one can do to violate it, including attempting to overthrow the government. That isn't what these guys are charged with. The passage you cite came directly from the statute and has nothing to do with kicking out one government in favor of another, just delaying the execution of a law.
 
Bud_Spencer said:
Read the statute. There are a number of things one can do to violate it, including attempting to overthrow the government. That isn't what these guys are charged with. The passage you cite came directly from the statute and has nothing to do with kicking out one government in favor of another, just delaying the execution of a law.
Click to expand...

Nobody marched on the Capitol with mere delay in mind. None of them would have been satisfied if Congress had decided to spend another month hearing all contests and grievances, and still in the end certified the election for Biden.
 
Bud_Spencer said:
Read the statute. There are a number of things one can do to violate it, including attempting to overthrow the government. That isn't what these guys are charged with. The passage you cite came directly from the statute and has nothing to do with kicking out one government in favor of another, just delaying the execution of a law.
Click to expand...

The passage I quoted was from the DoJ news release.
 
pecksniff said:
Nobody marched on the Capitol with mere delay in mind. None of them would have been satisfied if Congress had decided to spend another month hearing all contests and grievances, and still in the end certified the election for Biden.
Click to expand...

You might want avail the DoJ of your brilliant theory, Pecky, because the "delay" clause is exactly the one they are going after these guys on. It's right there in their press release.
 
ll74 said:
The passage I quoted was from the DoJ news conference.
Click to expand...

I know it was. And here's the statute the wording comes from:

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

Ergo, even the DoJ knows these guys weren't overthrowing the government, just delaying the proceedings.

The clause after that should have made things very interestig for those Portland assholes, no? I wonder why it didn't...
 
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/lead...dicted-federal-court-seditious-conspiracy-and
The seditious conspiracy indictment alleges that, following the Nov. 3, 2020, presidential election, Rhodes conspired with his co-defendants and others to oppose by force the execution of the laws governing the transfer of presidential power by Jan. 20, 2021. Beginning in late December 2020, via encrypted and private communications applications, Rhodes and various co-conspirators coordinated and planned to travel to Washington, D.C., on or around Jan. 6, 2021, the date of the certification of the electoral college vote, the indictment alleges. Rhodes and several co-conspirators made plans to bring weapons to the area to support the operation. The co-conspirators then traveled across the country to the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area in early January 2021.
Click to expand...
 
ll74 said:
https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/589616-fbi-arrests-oath-keepers-leader-on-jan-6-charges
Click to expand...

paging Traitor Rightguide, paging Traitor Wrongturd.... Charges of sedition handed out today.

DeSantis also had the same stupid comment..."if it's sedition, how come nobody is being charged with that?

These stupid mother fuckers....it's called the judicial and legal process, which takes time.

Source:https://ktvz.com/news/crime-courts/...ious-conspiracy-related-to-us-capitol-attack/
 
According to the indictment, the defendants conspired by organizing into teams that were prepared and willing to use force and to transport firearms and ammunition into Washington, D.C.

The indictment further alleges the Oath Keepers conspired by recruiting members and affiliates to participate in the conspiracy; organizing trainings to teach and learn paramilitary combat tactics; bringing and contributing paramilitary gear, weapons and supplies -- including knives, batons, camouflaged combat uniforms, tactical vests with plates, helmets, eye protection and radio equipment -- to the Capitol grounds.

The indictment also says the defendants breached and attempted to take control of the Capitol grounds and building on Jan. 6 2021, in an effort to prevent, hinder and delay the certification of the electoral college vote.


https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/202...urrection-seditious-conspiracy/5131642102425/
 
Bud_Spencer said:
Read the statute. There are a number of things one can do to violate it, including attempting to overthrow the government. That isn't what these guys are charged with. The passage you cite came directly from the statute and has nothing to do with kicking out one government in favor of another, just delaying the execution of a law.
Click to expand...
That’s right. They’re the little fish.
 
Score one indictment for the DOJ.

Basically, when you're working any sort of conspiracy charge you don't announce indictments for the members of the conspiracy until you're sure you have them all, then you unseal them and roll them out. Precisely because it will make the fish, both upstream and downstream, scatter. As they've done in this case. (10 other co-conspirators indicted as well.)

You generally don't try to roll a conspiracy up once you've announced charges. Now, they can pressure them to roll on their co-conspirators, if they've got anything tasty for the DOJ, but I'd guess someone already rolled and will be getting a plea bargain.

But, as a word of caution, remember the saying "you can indict a ham sandwich", largely because an indictment is issued by a grand jury and the defense team has no input into that process.
 
icanhelp1 said:
Very simple, if charged, prosecuted, tried by a jury of their peers then let the chips fall where they may.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that an indicted person gets a trial.

Good analysis there Einstein
 
phrodeau said:
That’s right. They’re the little fish.
Click to expand...

Is Pud so ignorant as to not know where this is leading???

I'm guessing willful ignorance on Pud's part

The Deplorables will continue to live in denial about 1/6, just like they live in denial about the Orange POS colludimg with Russia.

History will show that Cheetolini was rightfully twice impeached by decent Democrats, but that Deplorable Senate Republicans failed to uphold their oath of office and remove the Orange cancer from the Oval Office.

JFC

SAD!!!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jaF0
Still Proud, Boys?
Replies
20
Views
665
butters
butters
butters
jan 6th lawyer disbarred by court
2
Replies
27
Views
981
rockcasbah
rockcasbah
butters
oathkeepers scam members, spend money on liquor, adult shops+car repairs!
Replies
6
Views
306
pecksniff
P
U
Please Sign This Post of Sorrow and Sadness For Your Loss to the Clinton's
Replies
14
Views
2K
Politruk
P
Obama_Sucks
Your Assignment: Compile Obama’s Flip-Flops
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
Pad_Foot
Pad_Foot
Back
Top