re: Trump appointed judge releases J6 defendant early in rebuke of DOJ warnings

quote:

---

I'm not really defending anything.

---

Ok. On the hunt for another 20-pager, I guess.

quote:

---

Soon to shift into whataboutism ("well they did do it, but Democrats did it first")

---

You truly seem stuck on stupid. So Whataboutism is bad? Look at Joey, the classified documents he had in his possession were actually stolen compared to Trump who had every right to the documents he took home while he was still president. First president ever charged for failing to return the documents to NARA. NARA in reality is supposed to make all of Trump's (or any ex presidents) documents available to him gets charged. So yes you mental midget what about it?

quote:

---

They're idiots.

---

They key is their beliefs not their IQ, which they have no control over no more than a black person has over the color of their skin.

quote:

---

comparing a literal mob of idiots (violent ones, at that) pushing complete lunacy is not comparable to fighting for basic civil rights of non-whites and women.

---

Both groups were fighting for what they believed was their constitutional right.

quote:

---

So Whataboutism is bad?

---

Only for Democrats like SFP-TDS.

"Whataboutism" is an incredibly useful thing that illustrates the hypocrisy and dishonesty of the Democrats.

He only tries to frame it as "bad" because he can't defend his position.

quote:

---

"Whataboutism" is an incredibly useful thing

---

Agree. When very similar behaviors result in different applications of the law, people will be upset.

The alleged "whataboutism" really comes down to two types of comparisons:

(1) The comparison of protests related to grievances with public policy that have some element of violence. (Indeed, most persons having empathy with J6 defenders point out that similar types of protest have larger damages to persons and property than the protests of J6).

(2) The comparison of protests that impact congressional proceedings with the J6 protests. (In which case, many persons discuss even more direct impacts to the Congressional proceedings.)

The unique aspects of the J6 protests when compared to the others is mostly these elements:

I. The perceived threat that Congresspersons felt with this protest;

II. The fact that the proceedings were related to the Presidency; and

III. The continued visibility of the issue.

If we are a nation of laws rather than men, these shouldn't create the level of distinguishment we have seen in both the judicial outcomes of the proceedings or the executive enforcement of the proceedings. (Perhaps if there was a specific statute with enhanced penalties just for presidential determinations there would be an argument for different treatment under existing laws) In fact, the big hammer that the government has used is 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c) for the meat of most of the sentences. There has been such a unique application of this statute that you have had trial judges and appellate judges disagree with the application to J6 defendants, and the matter itself is before the Supreme Court in FISCHER, JOSEPH W. V. UNITED STATES. Those jurists aren't "patriots" any more than everyone disagreeing with the prosecution of J6 defendants all hold the same positions that are being ascribed to them.

Any time there is an issue of civil unrest, you will attract some violent people. Pick any contentious issue and you will have some ne'er-do-wells in the group. That isn't the case or the objection.

Many of the larger sentences are being handed down not to people who have committed specific acts of violence or mayhem, they are being handed down to people related to a conspiracy to violate a statute that is having a unique and tenuous application.