The Jan. 6 Investigation

Status
Not open for further replies.
PhantomWolf said:
Did anyone die there? Felony Murder requires that those charged are involved with the crime that was happening at the time of the killing, only those directly involved can be charged, there is nothing arbitrary about that.
Click to expand...

It's arbitrary because you're picking a single event when this insurrection was hundreds of events. If the first barricade isn't broken through there is no opportunity to break into the chambers. All these people are involved in an insurrection. In my view the guy who broke through the front door is just as guiltyas those trying to break into the Senate chamber.
 
acbytesla said:
Maybe. But other windows and doors were broken through by the rioters. Do you charge anyone near those locations? This seems too arbitrary.
Click to expand...
Come on Mr Tesla, don't be so willing to write off the guy that broke the windows in the door Babbitt climbed through when she got shot. Some of those people trying to bash down that specific door at that specific time are more than implicated in a specific crime that resulted in a death. No one is saying everyone who broke a window or a door down is connected to everything else that happened.
 
acbytesla said:
It's arbitrary because you're picking a single event when this insurrection was hundreds of events. If the first barricade isn't broken through there is no opportunity to break into the chambers. All these people are involved in an insurrection. In my view the guy who broke through the front door is just as guiltyas those trying to break into the Senate chamber.
Click to expand...
That doesn't mean this was all or none lawbreaking. It's not up to your view, it's up to the law and the prosecutors.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Come on Mr Tesla, don't be so willing to write off the guy that broke the windows in the door Babbitt climbed through when she got shot. Some of those people trying to bash down that specific door at that specific time are more than implicated in a specific crime that resulted in a death. No one is saying everyone who broke a window or a door down is connected to everything else that happened.
Click to expand...

Skeptic Ginger said:
That doesn't mean this was all or none lawbreaking. It's not up to your view, it's up to the law and the prosecutors.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I'm not a fan of felony murder especially in theses circumstances. IMV, this is far worse. I think many of these people including Trump should see an end like Saddam Hussein. They should swing. But not for felony murder.
 
acbytesla said:
It's arbitrary because you're picking a single event when this insurrection was hundreds of events. If the first barricade isn't broken through there is no opportunity to break into the chambers. All these people are involved in an insurrection. In my view the guy who broke through the front door is just as guiltyas those trying to break into the Senate chamber.
Click to expand...

But that isn't how the law works. The law requires it to be only those involved in the crime occurring at the time of the death, and only those involved specifically in that crime. This is the exact opposite of arbitary. It's saying that if you were at place A and involved in the committing of Crime B when person C was killed, you are able to be charged with Felony Murder. Just because person Y was down the hallway committing crime E at the time and thus doesn't get charged, doesn't make it arbitrary. Even if Crime B and Crime E are the exact same statutes being broken unless there is a strong and valid connection between those crimes such as the participants all agreeing to do them in a conspiracy, then there is no ability to charge people outside the group commiting the crime at the time of the killing.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
That doesn't mean this was all or none lawbreaking. It's not up to your view, it's up to the law and the prosecutors.
Click to expand...
You're right, It isn't. But my bet is no one will be charged with felony murder. We can bet avatars. The loser has to use the avatar the other picks for them for a month.
 
Last edited:
Ziggurat's downplaying of the threat made to both Pence and Pelosi is duly noted:

They didn't actually FIND the people they were threatening to kill so no actual attempt was made! How dare you contend that was their intent?

This handwaving away is just typical "It wasn't that bad! You're just being emotional" crap.
 
PhantomWolf said:
But that isn't how the law works. The law requires it to be only those involved in the crime occurring at the time of the death, and only those involved specifically in that crime. This is the exact opposite of arbitary. It's saying that if you were at place A and involved in the committing of Crime B when person C was killed, you are able to be charged with Felony Murder. Just because person Y was down the hallway committing crime E at the time and thus doesn't get charged, doesn't make it arbitrary. Even if Crime B and Crime E are the exact same statutes being broken unless there is a strong and valid connection between those crimes such as the participants all agreeing to do them in a conspiracy, then there is no ability to charge people outside the group commiting the crime at the time of the killing.
Click to expand...

OK then. You might be right.

But I stand by my argument that no one will stand trial facing that charge.
 
Ziggurat said:
You can call it whatever you want, it remains true. Insulting me won't change that. More investigation won't find what they've been unable to find any trace of so far.

And really, what do you expect? You expect a grand conspiracy spearheaded by the likes of that idiot with a buffalo hat and face paint? That's how you topple the US federal government? Please. They might find a few loons in a basement who "conspired", but there isn't going to be anything else, no matter how long you look.
Click to expand...

You clearly have not read the superseding conspiracy indictments against the 12 Oath Keepers. Here is some reading for you...

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/press-release/file/1382471/download

The indictment goes into great detail about the pre-planning, recruitment and training these people did - where they stayed, how they travelled to and from DC, and what they did on January 6, including communications and messages, code names, the equipment they brought with them such as combat gear, radio comms equipment and firearms caches held nearby with a "Quick Reaction Force" of additional, as yet unindicted members ready to go if Trump's order came and the shooting started.

You really are a long, long way behind the 8 ball here. Most everyone else here in this thread is already familiar with these facts. You have a lot of catching up to do if you want to be able to debate credibly on this topic.
 
acbytesla said:
You're right, It isn't. But my bet is no one will be charged with felony murder. We can bet avatars. The loser has to use the avatar the other picks for them for a month.
Click to expand...
I'm not giving up my adorable Arctic Snowy Owlets. :) I don't know what the charges on all these guys will be. And if they plea down to lesser charges, how it that predictable?
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
You clearly have not read the superseding conspiracy indictments against the 12 Oath Keepers. Here is some reading for you...
Click to expand...
Could you pay more attention to what Ziggurat said? Those people are the loons in a basement he just acknowledged in the quote you just made of him.


The facts as they actually are should be fine.
 
Joecool said:
Who said the GOP congress was against "any investigation"?

Or turning the spin around, why was Pelosi against a bipartisan investigation?
Click to expand...

Bipartisan investigation was killed by the GOP in the Senate.

You really think we are stupid enough not to know that?

That is what is annoyning about Trumpers:They all think we are as stupid as they are.

And this poster is a sad exmaple of what happens when you depend on Newxmax, FOx, and OANN for all your news.
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
You clearly have not read the superseding conspiracy indictments against the 12 Oath Keepers. Here is some reading for you...
Click to expand...

You clearly didn’t read my post if you think that contradicts anything I said.
 
Stacyhs said:
Ziggurat's downplaying of the threat made to both Pence and Pelosi is duly noted:

They didn't actually FIND the people they were threatening to kill so no actual attempt was made! How dare you contend that was their intent?

This handwaving away is just typical "It wasn't that bad! You're just being emotional" crap.
Click to expand...

I said nothing about the Pence threats because I haven’t looked into them yet. I commented on the Pelosi threats that were referenced earlier because, unlike you, I actually read through the court documents that they came from. You thought they were classified and unavailable even though I already linked directly to them. How clueless is that?

And I said that no attempt was made because, get this, the woman in question never even went looking. It was always just empty posturing.
 
So many thoughts on this that bounce around for me. At the time it was happening, the anxiety produced due to external things happening (to me) made it too much to follow. This was different than the general rioting going on elsewhere. Location matters. At the same time, the hyperbole in describing it is staggering. The saddest part is that I have no faith in the intentions of this investigation. Does anyone feel differently?
 
RecoveringYuppy said:
Could you pay more attention to what Ziggurat said? Those people are the loons in a basement he just acknowledged in the quote you just made of him.


The facts as they actually are should be fine.
Click to expand...

No!

He has previously claimed that no conspiracy exists. I'm going to assume he still thinks that until such time as he walks it back and admits his claim is incorrect!!!
 
When it comes to "life-threatening" circumstances, there's only one situation where I take officer testimony at face-value: When an agent of the state shoots unarmed Black boys. Har, har, har. In all seriousness, I'm like everyone else: I look at things on a case-by-case basis and determine if what's being said is convenient for my political beliefs.
 
smartcooky said:
No!

He has previously claimed that no conspiracy exists. I'm going to assume he still thinks that until such time as he walks it back and admits his claim is incorrect!!!
Click to expand...

This is simply false. I never said there were no conspiracies of any sort. I always qualified it.

Ziggurat said:
You expect a grand conspiracy spearheaded by the likes of that idiot with a buffalo hat and face paint?
Click to expand...
Ziggurat said:
I doubt it. There was no grand conspiracy here.
Click to expand...

That word is there for a reason. The kind of conspiracy that the Oathkeepers were charged with is not grand, by any stretch of the imagination. And the fact that they are already being charged also demonstrates that such pathetic conspiracies don’t require years of investigation to unravel. They come apart pretty easily.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom