Sedition Charges Filed

[Leo Gura]

Finally, official charges for the failed coup:

 

[Preety_India]

I'm crying. This was so hard to watch. 

I hope Trump faces his karma. Too many people suffered because of his propaganda. 

 

[Sempiternity]

Meaningless unless Trump and his closest circle of enablers, such as many Republican Senators, get charged with Sedition too, and get convicted. Without that, it sends a clear message to other Republican politicians that they can plan another insurrection with zero consequences. Because who cares if the cannon fodder/low level brainwashed imps get charged, if all the planners get away with it? Unless there are consequences for Trump, things will undoubtedly get worse, and the future of our Democracy is bleak. 

[Hardkill]

Yeah, I agree with @Sempiternity. 

It actually infuriates me that Trump still hasn't been convicted of ANY CRIME! Even after he has done for most of his life!

Edited January 14, 2022 by Hardkill

[BlueOak]

Go after the people who incite violence, intimidate etc, and in doing so you preserve the political process, the individual rights, and even free speech of others not doing these things. When people face consequences for breaking the law, most stop doing it. Done in a calm lawful manner, tempers quell and you get more peaceful dialogue.

The only thing I have as an outsider to note is, this will overshadow your next election cycle and you'll miss talking or doing anything about issues not related to this. This might be what people will try to win the election on for example, and then it becomes something else entirely. So watchout for people using it to score points, or run theater, rather than talk about what it was, or is, from either party you have over there.

Also I would wager trump will be never be charged with anything criminal. Its hard to realise but this might be a heavy argument for a year or so, which he will use and his opponents will use. From what i've seen he actually plays that exchange of blame better the democrats do, and the more they insist the more he is able to get his supporters to rise up the opposite way. Remember who he is, and remember who his base are, how loyal they are to him.

Not trying to preach as a foreigner here, just trying to get you to see it from the outside looking in. No matter what the truth was, who was right and who was wrong, it usually ends up in a word slinging match and that always favors him. Because to be frank he does better in a crowd every time, he lives off that.
 

[Danioover9000]

   Great that they are finally pursuing sedition charges against those involved in the insurrection attempt, except that it technically isn't a proper insurrection, more a bunch of angry alt right mobs, because if it really was a well planned insurrection attempt, then thousands of lives would've been killed in that day, So, if they charge everybody involved, from the ones who were at the site damaging property, to the ones premeditating the whole thing from behind the scenes, then it's going to be difficult because they can only really go after the ones who've actually on site, damaging stuff first. The best they can hope for is charging everybody involved, directly and indirectly, but is a lesser charge to Donald Trump and others who were hanging back for inciting the mob.

[Mason Riggle]

@Danioover9000 "That bank robbery wasn't a proper bank robbery, more like angry demands for cash, because if it was a well planned bank robbery attempt, then millions would have been stolen."

Just because you fail to accomplish a crime, because you are stopped during the commission of the crime, doesn't make it somehow 'less of a crime'. 

 

[Danioover9000]

@Mason Riggle

2 hours ago, Mason Riggle said:

@Danioover9000 "That bank robbery wasn't a proper bank robbery, more like angry demands for cash, because if it was a well planned bank robbery attempt, then millions would have been stolen."

Just because you fail to accomplish a crime, because you are stopped during the commission of the crime, doesn't make it somehow 'less of a crime'. 

 

   It makes it less of a crime. This is why we have the legal system, with different levels of charges and punishments, like first degree murder, second degree murder, third degree murder, premeditated murder, crime of passion ect. Plus, for every charge, we have different degrees of sentencing, 1 year, 5 years, 10-20 years plus probation, 25 to life with/without parole, death penalties ect. If we don't have these degrees, then using your analogy, if I carried out a bank robbery, the charges against me would be blanket and general, for every type of thief and how the theft is carried, instead of it being like first degree premeditated, or second degree by accomplice, or a crime of passion/opportunity, and considering what sentencing is appropriate, we don't have that, and instead we charge all thieves as only premeditated, or only give out life without parole/death penaties. We would have a huge problem.

   The main issue, is if I want to punish Donald Trump and his administration, the oath keepers and other groups in that event, and the sedition charges are not aligned with the Jan 6 insurrection, then I'm and my team are gonna have a serious uphill battle to try and lay charges against them. It's like if I'm a prosecutor and charging the bank robbers, but I'm going for life without parole/death penalty instead of carefully attacking the actual specifics of the crimes committed, the judge and juries might have more doubt in accepting my case, and the defense team would have more room to undermine my case as to severe a charge. However, if I pursue a lesser charge, or a charge that matches exactly the crime done, I can handle that situation. That's sort of what I meant, to not jump too quickly in calling an angry protest as insurrection, because those people would then call every violent protest, left or right, as attempted insurrections. Notice how that can swing back and be used against left protests as well. 

   Another example, is the O. J. Simpson case, a different context, but look at how the specifics are mishandled. We ideally don't want that playing out.

Edited January 19, 2022 by Danioover9000

[Mason Riggle]

@Danioover9000

§2383. Rebellion or insurrection

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.

 

in·sur·rec·tion

/ˌinsəˈrekSH(ə)n/

Learn to pronounce

noun

a violent uprising against an authority or government.


Do you think it was a 'proper insurrection' or no? I don't see the part where it says lots of people have to die for it to be a 'proper insurrection'. 

Edited January 19, 2022 by Mason Riggle

[Danioover9000]

@Mason Riggle

15 minutes ago, Mason Riggle said:

@Danioover9000

§2383. Rebellion or insurrection

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.

 

in·sur·rec·tion

/ˌinsəˈrekSH(ə)n/

Learn to pronounce

noun

a violent uprising against an authority or government.


Do you think it was a 'proper insurrection' or no? I don't see the part where it says lots of people have to die for it to be a 'proper insurrection'. 

   I think the January 6th insurrection, compared to other insurrection events historically, and in other areas of the world, extremely violent, bloody coups, where the mob is using open/conceal carry munitions and militia, that's an extreme and proper insurrection to me. That's my own personal view on a violent uprising, but I'll concede and include your view and expand on the possible forms of insurrections.

   And I'm not completely disagreeing on this issue with you, I do want those sedition charges to be passed against those involved directly and indirectly in the jan 6th insurrection for the duture. What I feel insecure about is if this can be later used against 'peaceful protests' when it's mostly non-violent in the future.

Edited January 19, 2022 by Danioover9000

[Mason Riggle]

On 1/16/2022 at 0:09 PM, Danioover9000 said:

The best they can hope for is charging everybody involved, directly and indirectly, but is a lesser charge to Donald Trump and others who were hanging back for inciting the mob.

"The best we can hope for is charging.. Donald Trump and others who were... inciting the [insurrection]".  

Fixed it for ya. 

[Danioover9000]

@Mason Riggle

1 hour ago, Mason Riggle said:

"The best we can hope for is charging.. Donald Trump and others who were... inciting the [insurrection]".  

Fixed it for ya. 

   We'll agree to disagree then.

[Mason Riggle]

@Danioover9000 not sure where we disagree.   You seem to agree that Trump incited the mob that stormed that capitol.  You say, "Donald Trump and others who were hanging back for inciting the mob".. I mean.. those are your words.  Do you disagree with yourself?

There are laws specifically for dealing with someone who incites an insurrection.   Do you disagree that these are the laws?

I shared the definition of an insurrection.  Do you disagree with the definition? 

So who is it you disagree with? Me, or facts? 

[Danioover9000]

@Mason Riggle  I don't know why you still misunderstand me. Read the below again.

19 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Mason Riggle

   I think the January 6th insurrection, compared to other insurrection events historically, and in other areas of the world, extremely violent, bloody coups, where the mob is using open/conceal carry munitions and militia, that's an extreme and proper insurrection to me. That's my own personal view on a violent uprising, but I'll concede and include your view and expand on the possible forms of insurrections.

   And I'm not completely disagreeing on this issue with you, I do want those sedition charges to be passed against those involved directly and indirectly in the jan 6th insurrection for the duture. What I feel insecure about is if this can be later used against 'peaceful protests' when it's mostly non-violent in the future.

   So where exactly do you agree or disagree with me here???

   Is it about Donald Trump? I disagree with his role in being the president at the time, but I don't share and bask in the collective hatred towards him either. I also recognize that he is a manipulator

   Is it the sedition?

   I'll be back later, after I'm done with my life purpose.

[Danioover9000]

@Mason Riggle

1 hour ago, Mason Riggle said:

@Danioover9000 not sure where we disagree.   You seem to agree that Trump incited the mob that stormed that capitol.  You say, "Donald Trump and others who were hanging back for inciting the mob".. I mean.. those are your words.  Do you disagree with yourself?

There are laws specifically for dealing with someone who incites an insurrection.   Do you disagree that these are the laws?

I shared the definition of an insurrection.  Do you disagree with the definition? 

So who is it you disagree with? Me, or facts? 

   Yes, I said that Donald Trump was indirectly inciting the mob to storm the cqpital. I don't disagree I said that, so whats your point you're making? That I'm not allowed to disagree/agree with myself??

   Yes, there are laws against those that incite insurrection, sedition, and treason. I agree such laws exist. What are you trying to say?

   Yes, I agree with the definition. The only thing here I don't agree on, is that the definition isn't expansive enough to include all types of insurrection, sedition and treasons, such as violent, militarized coups/insurrection on one end of the spectrum, and the other the legal and behind the scenes, lobbyists types of sedition. Do you agree/disagree that insurrection exists in a spectrum, that insurrection isn't binary?

   

[Mason Riggle]

1 hour ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Mason Riggle

Do you agree/disagree that insurrection exists in a spectrum, that insurrection isn't binary?

   

I don't think the laws are ambiguous.  Sure, the notion of 'insurrection' exists in a spectrum, but the laws are pretty clear.

§2383. Rebellion or insurrection

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.

[Mason Riggle]

@Danioover9000 we might agree that 'Inciting an Insurrection' may turn out to be too difficult to prove, in which case lesser, more easily provable charges may be pursued in this case.. but I think that charging him under this specific law, which would bar him for holding office ever again.. is the best we can hope for.