Generational Dynamics Forum - New Site

jdcpapa wrote: Fri Feb 17, 2023 12:32 pm Has anyone been charged and convicted of insurrection?

Four Oath Keepers were recently convicted of "Seditious Conspiracy". Is that close enough? There is a Proud Boys trial currently going on involving the same charge. Yes, the Washington DC district attorneys are going faster with the little fish, the DoJ much slower with the actual conspirators. Some of it is Trump's delay tactics, appealing every little step of the way. Both the DoJ and the courts are getting a little tired of this.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/four-oat ... tol-breach
https://www.npr.org/2023/01/17/11495820 ... cy-charges

I also vaguely recall that a few politicians were forbidden from holding office under the Fourteenth Amendment. That holds that if you took part in an insurrection, you could not hold office. As I recall it, these were small fry who actually entered the capitol. They pled guilty of things like assaulting officers, criminal trespass and stealing stuff. This was good enough for the judge to declare them insurrectionists by 14th Amendment standards. Would such be common for those on your list?

See the following.

https://www.citizensforethics.org/news/ ... amendment/

Bob Butler wrote: Fri Feb 17, 2023 12:45 pm

jdcpapa wrote: Fri Feb 17, 2023 12:32 pm Has anyone been charged and convicted of insurrection?

Four Oath Keepers were recently convicted of "Seditious Conspiracy". Is that close enough?

According to the articles: approximately 950 individuals were arrested, 476 of the "rioters" pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges, 9 individuals were convicted of seditious conspiracy. At best, it is defined as a "seditious conspiracy" not as an "insurrection". The preponderance of evidence, thus far, does not support a well defined seditious conspiracy. I am not convinced the distinction justifies calling someone out as a "liar".

There is a Proud Boys trial currently going on involving the same charge. Yes, the Washington DC district attorneys are going faster with the little fish, the DoJ much slower with the actual conspirators. Some of it is Trump's delay tactics, appealing every little step of the way. Both the DoJ and the courts are getting a little tired of this.

Can you provided a cite for the underlined sentence?

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/four-oat ... tol-breach
https://www.npr.org/2023/01/17/11495820 ... cy-charges

I also vaguely recall that a few politicians were forbidden from holding office under the Fourteenth Amendment. That holds that if you took part in an insurrection, you could not hold office. As I recall it, these were small fry who actually entered the capitol, but that they pled guilty of assaulting officers, criminal trespass and stealing stuff was good enough for the judge to declare them insurrectionists. Would such be common for those on your list?

It is not my list. The list was published by the Insider.

See the following.

https://www.citizensforethics.org/news/ ... amendment/

So in your cite, one individual out of all of those individuals charged was disqualified for office as I understand it. Also, this is the only Judge out of all the other Judges hearing cases on the subject that defined it as an insurrection. You use it as a basis to call someone out as a liar?

US Code wrote:Seditious conspiracy 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.

14th Amendment Section 3 wrote:No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Mirrim Webster wrote:Insurrection: a violent uprising against an authority or government.

It seems all three apply to various people, though due process is hardly complete.

Now two of the people who visited the capitol have been labled as insurrectionists, the only two that so far have tried to run for office after pleading guilty. Two suits were brought, the judges held them to be insurrectionists, and banned them from office. More have been found guilty of seditious conspiracy. If any of the hundreds of others who either have already plead guilty or are in progress of trial try to run for office, I expect the precedent to hold - barring innocent verdicts, which have been rare. If the others have not been judicially declared insurrectionists, it is because none have decided to run for office.

Do you believe these laws should not be in place? Insurrection, use of force, seditious conspiracy or whatever you call it, should be allowed to proceed?

I'm not sure where this should be, but likely not the Abortion thread...

Bob Butler wrote: Fri Feb 17, 2023 7:27 pm
It seems all three apply to various people, though due process is hardly complete.

Now two of the people who visited the capitol have been labled as insurrectionists, the only two that so far have tried to run for office after pleading guilty. Two suits were brought, the judges held them to be insurrectionists, and banned them from office. More have been found guilty of seditious conspiracy. If any of the hundreds of others who either have already plead guilty or are in progress of trial try to run for office, I expect the precedent to hold - barring innocent verdicts, which have been rare. If the others have not been judicially declared insurrectionists, it is because none have decided to run for office.

Do you believe these laws should not be in place? Insurrection, use of force, seditious conspiracy or whatever you call it, should be allowed to proceed?

You agree that this event is not a well organized insurrection or seditious conspiracy. Once again, how can you justify calling forum members out as liars when you essentially are in agreement?

Bob Butler wrote: I'm not sure where this should be, but likely not the Abortion thread...

Take a moment and think back to previous posts with other forum members wherein they have responded to you with regards to your thread. It's your thread! Why did you post it in abortion in the first place? I think you know very well where it should be.

jdcpapa wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 11:08 amYou agree that this event is not a well organized insurrection or seditious conspiracy. Once again, how can you justify calling forum members out as liars when you essentially are in agreement?

I do not agree. Well, it could have been better organized, but is was definitely an insurrection and seditious conspiracy. The courts have spoken. It fit the definitions I posted last time. There was violence against the government, an official procedure was delayed by violence, police were assaulted, etc... It was definitely an insurrection by the common definition and a seditious conspiracy by the US Code. To say otherwise would be lying. I'm sick of some of you guys lying blatantly whenever you confront facts you don't care for. I call such people liars because they are.

I did notice when I did research for these last few posts, I found the information on government web pages, law schools and blue media posts, but did not see anything from Fox News. If Fox is your media outlet of choice, you might not have heard some of this stuff. You could have a cockeyed idea of what January 6 was, and believe that it was just a tourist visit, no matter what the videos show.

Do you believe violence should be part of the regular election process? Do you believe the laws in place to punish insurrection not proper or not properly applied?

If you are looking to justify an insurrection, the American place to look is the Declaration of Independence. If you are looking to discourage or prevent insurrection, the place to look is Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. You might try to argue that the Declaration of Independence is the more relevant description of January 6? I do not believe so, but you could take a shot at it.

US Code wrote: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.

This sounds like a codification of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Is posting favorable opinions of the January 6 insurrection a form of aid and comfort? It looks like this one has been pretty much ignored.

Bob Butler wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 1:42 pm Well, it could have been better organized

You agree it was not a well organized seditious conspiracy or insurrection.

Here are the approximate stats from the articles linked during our interaction: 950 people arrested, 284 charged with assault (of those charged 44 pleaded guilty), 9 convicted of seditious conspiracy (4 were Oath keepers), 428 pleaded guilty to picketing, demonstrating, parading, disorderly conduct and theft. The 4 Oath keepers were not related to the other 5 convicted of seditious conspiracy. The individuals convicted of seditious conspiracy represent less than 1% of those arrested. No one has been convicted of insurrection.

but is was definitely an insurrection and seditious conspiracy.

The stats do not support that allegation: 45% of those arrested were picketing, demonstrating and parading, etc., 5% pleaded guilty to assault, less than 1% were convicted of seditious conspiracy. No one was convicted of insurrection, 24% or 229 arrests are pending and apparently no charges have been filed, 26% or 240 charges have been filed for assault and awaiting trial or a plea arrangement.

jdcpapa wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 6:37 pmYou agree it was not a well organized seditious conspiracy or insurrection.

It was still a seditious conspiracy on the part of some. Guilty as charged in some cases. The White House people have not yet been charged, so we’ll have to wait a bit. The 950 were charged with the acts of violence, trespass, theft, destruction of property, etc… rather than insurrection. Simpler and easier to prove. Charging them twice for the same act would be double jeopardy, so they didn’t. Still, they were insurrectionist in the eyes of federal judges. I trust their opinion much more than yours.

This is what I meant by lying. If truths are inconvenient, many folks here lie.

I can agree that the insurrection could have been organized better. For example, some insurrectionists were waiting on Trump invoking a law that would effectively deputize them, and would not bring firearms into Washington DC until he did. Trump never did invoke that law. The insurrectionists got documents for the fake electors well in advance, but sent proof of the fraud to Congress and Archives. The insurrectionists called the Georgia state department guy on a recorded line, etc…. It was organized, but not well organized. Too many people even in the inner circle knew the insurrection was illegal and not likely to work. The insurrectionists tried to bring people into the insurrection before they knew where their loyalties were. Too many people were loyal to America more than to Trump.

But doing a crime in a disorderly, ineffective and clumsy way is not a defense in court that will get you off the crime. Try clumsily and awkwardly robbing a bank if you don’t believe me.

Bob Butler wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 9:01 pm Still, they were insurrectionist in the eyes of federal judges.

You have not provided any evidence in support of your assertion.

Bob Butler wrote:I trust their opinion much more than yours.

I have not rendered an opinion.

jdcpapa wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 9:17 pm

Bob Butler wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 9:01 pm Still, they were insurrectionist in the eyes of federal judges.

You have not provided any evidence in support of your assertion.

I have provided links to the court cases where folks were found guilty and the text of the laws violated. What more do you want me to provide?

Worldviews can override facts. They prevent people from reevaluating the situation honestly by blocking the facts. One of the things I am doing is demonstrating this. It is not stupidity. It is that some facts are unacceptable from certain perspectives. It is as if the facts don't exist.

jdcpapa wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 9:17 pm

Bob Butler wrote:I trust their opinion much more than yours.

I have not rendered an opinion.

jdcpapa wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 11:08 amYou agree that this event is not a well organized insurrection or seditious conspiracy.

That second quote is an opinion. It echoes another opinion, a highly questionable one, that if a crime is unorganized, that is a defense against the crime. You might be able to get away with a crime, but not if it is as disorganized as the insurrection. Whenever someone does a crime poorly he is found guilty. He is not given a pass on the crime.

Bob Butler wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 6:46 am I have provided links to the court cases where folks were found guilty and the text of the laws violated. What more do you want me to provide?

You have provided one link to one case regarding a violation of the 14th amendment. The Judge (the only Judge according to the link) determined that the defendant's conduct rose to the level of an insurrection. There was no indication in the link that the defendant was convicted of insurrection.

Bob Butler wrote:Worldviews can override facts. They prevent people from reevaluating the situation honestly by blocking the facts. One of the things I am doing is demonstrating this. It is not stupidity. It is that some facts are unacceptable from certain perspectives. It is as if the facts don't exist.

I have presented the statistical facts based on your links. So far, the facts support your claim that there was an unorganized seditious conspiracy by 4 individuals.

jdcpapa wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 11:08 amYou agree that this event is not a well organized insurrection or seditious conspiracy.

Bob Butler wrote:That second quote is an opinion.

Bob Butler wrote:Well, it could have been better organized

Your opinion.