The Trump Card...

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Or this fellow:
Dude, Jacob Chansley didn't have a gun put to his head - at least so far as we know - to make him walk into the Capitol.

He chose to ... and went of his own free will.



No idea.

But I do know there have been cases where Jan 6th domestic terrorists have been charged under court seal ... and the cases are not unsealed until months afterwards.

It's not at all uncommon.

:tearsofjoy:



Nope, sure don't ... just like I don't have information on the 1500+ or so others who haven't been identified yet.

:tearsofjoy:
Didn’t think so. But if they turnout to be informants, there some explaining to do. Informants aren’t supposed to actually be breaking the law themselves and facilitate others to break it as well: such as ordering people to fill up the capitol, waving people in by scaffold guy, Epps, and others on the tape. And removing barriers so people don’t know where the restricted zone is.
Like this guy:
 

Attachments

  • 2177138B-A6DD-4B3E-94F0-E0A0EB53034B.png
    2177138B-A6DD-4B3E-94F0-E0A0EB53034B.png
    1.6 MB · Views: 6
  • Haha
Reactions: RLENT

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
If that is true there would be a plethora of cases where it would fall under entrapment, and information about these fellows would have to be given to Defense attorneys during discovery.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RLENT

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Or this fellow:

Didn’t think so. But if they turnout to be informants, there some explaining to do. Informants aren’t supposed to actually be breaking the law themselves and facilitate others to break it as well: such as ordering people to fill up the capitol, waving people in by scaffold guy, Epps, and others on the tape. And removing barriers so people don’t know where the restricted zone is.
Like this guy:

Well ... duh.

Of course, what you're speculating on is a big "if" ... particularly absent any evidence that they are actually informants.

:tearsofjoy:

Instead they caught the big fish, like grandma:

What ... are you proposing there should be a "Legal Exemption for Grandma" now ?

:tearsofjoy:

If that is true there would be a plethora of cases where it would fall under entrapment, and information about these fellows would have to be given to Defense attorneys during discovery.

Again: Duh.

:tearsofjoy:
 
  • Haha
Reactions: danthewolf00

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Well ... duh.

Of course, what you're speculating on is a big "if" ... particularly absent any evidence that they are actually informants.

:tearsofjoy:



What ... are you proposing there should be a "Legal Exemption for Grandma" now ?

:tearsofjoy:



Again: Duh.

:tearsofjoy:
Well if grandma was waved or directed in by an officer or an informant I would think she would have a case for entrapment.

More likely than not that there were informants. Since historically they have used them for stuff like this.
Also, see Witmer case that is having “issues” with their witness list.
 
Last edited:

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Well if grandma was waved or directed in by an officer or an informant I would think she would have a case for entrapment.

That's a big if ...

You have any evidence to support it ?

More likely than not that there were informants. Since historically they have used them for stuff like this.

Entirely possible.

Also, see Witmer case that is having “issues” with their witness list.

Is that case still proceeding in both state and federal courts ?
 

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
That's a big if ...

You have any evidence to support it ?



Entirely possible.



Is that case still proceeding in both state and federal courts ?
From reports I’ve read the case is turning into a dumpster fire.
 

Ragman

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
It's not looking good for miz governor.

How so ?

I mean I understand her approval rating is down from it's high point but she's still above water (more approve than disapprove) in the last poll I saw (from September I think)


Of course.

The defense has been crying entrapment since Day One - it's their job to advocate for their clients so that's a no brainer.

Whether it gets admitted or not is another matter ... as is whether a jury finds it determinative of actual entrapment if it does eventually get admitted.
 

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
No real surprise there I guess ... given the kind of stuff you seem inclined to read.
I'll take the lack of response to my question about whether the case is still proceeding as a "Yes".
Let’s just say I don’t sheepishly get my news from NBC news and Lester Holt.
Yes,it’s going forward at the moment, but looks to be teetering due to issues with the dwindling witness list, which is increasingly showing credibility problems and compromised interests.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RLENT

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
How so ?

I mean I understand her approval rating is down from it's high point but she's still above water (more approve than disapprove) in the last poll I saw (from September I think)



Of course.

The defense has been crying entrapment since Day One - it's their job to advocate for their clients so that's a no brainer.

Whether it gets admitted or not is another matter ... as is whether a jury finds it determinative of actual entrapment if it does eventually get admitted.
What are they going to do when their witness list drops to zero?
 
  • Like
Reactions: danthewolf00

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Let’s just say I don’t sheepishly get my news from NBC news and Lester Holt.

So sheepishly at Revolver, Federalist, Breitbart, Gateway Pundit, and the like then ?

:tearsofjoy:

Yes,it’s going forward at the moment,

Thanks for clearing that up.

but looks to be teetering due to issues with the dwindling witness list, which is increasingly showing credibility problems and compromised interests.

Admittedly, I haven't followed it all that closely ... since it's not local (not in my state) and only marginally a national issue (another instance of the rise of violent rightwing extremism)

Be interesting though to see what the outcome actually is.
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
It just seems to me, she has mastered the art of not answering a question as presented (a sign of something to hide, especially in this case).

I haven't read anything on her addressing the matter so not personally familiar.

But she's a politician ... sooo ... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ragman

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I only brought up the Whitmer case to give an example about informants infiltrating into groups, organizations, and gatherings. News reports say they were there in the BLM riots in Portland last year. We know there was a heavy amount in the Whitmer case as well. It wouldn’t be a stretch to acknowledge that the Jan6 gathering/protest/riot included them too. Then it would be about analyzing the video about actions done by people( using the doj’s current shock and awe criteria) and ask questions about why certain individuals haven’t been charged with actions that they’re similarly charging others with. Epps, scaffold guy, etc. appear to protected. The issue though isn’t whether there should be informants infiltration but the actions of them and whether they broke the law themselves or instigated, concocted, pushed people to break the law.
But regarding the Witmer case, OOF…do they have problems with their lead guy:



00EE6449-244D-4C57-B4BA-2324FE7EEE29.gif

So sheepishly at Revolver, Federalist, Breitbart, Gateway Pundit, and the like then ?

:tearsofjoy:



Thanks for clearing that up.



Admittedly, I haven't followed it all that closely ... since it's not local (not in my state) and only marginally a national issue (another instance of the rise of violent rightwing extremism)

Be interesting though to see what the outcome actually is.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: danthewolf00
Top