re: J6 prisoner speaks out. ‘I have been held 1000 days without trial.’

quote:

---

Wait, are you saying FEDs weren’t there?

Damn, you’ve gone off the deep end

---

No, he's fuiking autistic and likes to run his mouth.

He made an assertion that certain people DESERVED to be imprisoned indefinitely.

I challenged him to back up his assertion.

He cannot and will not try.

He will now do what he always does, shite on the chessboard then strut around like he won the game.

quote:

---

Depends on the person and what they did/are charged with.

---

quote:

---

There were some really nasty people who did violent things for no reason on J6 who deserve to be jailed.

---

link to this evidence, please.

quote:

---

There was a much smaller group of people who came in after those above created chaos who were given false confidence about the propriety of their behaviors. They should not be prosecuted.

---

"created" chaos.

testimony under oath has said that they lost count of how many FBI provocateurs/informants there were on J6.

how in the world can it be proven who was and wasn't enticed and provoked?

now that it has come out that the Q Shamon was an FBI informant- (BTW this is a duh many refused to see) it sheds a light on the entire J6 day being one big set-up, no?

When you are a pretend Internet Lawyer and you make the assertion

"There were some really nasty people who did violent things for no reason on J6 who deserve to be jailed."

....you can't just paste a piece of propaganda of a bunch of Larpers and Feds then walk away.

quote:

---

Are we to believe all of this? None of this is exaggerated?

---

Shitty, biased "reporting"

One google search gave me the docket for his appeal

On September 25, the government filed for another extension of time to respond. In the motion, the ASUA states, "Counsel for petitioner does not oppose this further extension."

Here is a Newsweek article about his appeal strategy

quote:

---

In the petition to the Supreme Court, Lang's team argues that the defendant did not satisfy the "corrupt" element and that various interpretations in lower courts have led to a "cacophonous result that leaves unsettled significant issues."

"The petitioner submits that the Justice Department's overbroad application of the federal penal code to prosecute participants in the January 6, 2021 riot at the Capitol is the act of a behemoth unrecognized, unwarranted and unwelcome in American life," the petition reads.

It went on: "Our political life for centuries has been fractious, with violence all too frequent. Seeking to punish and silence dissent in the name of democracy is the twisted dream of a slumbering tyrant."

The petition urged the justices to hear the case "as the nation's attention turns to the 2024 election." It argued that there is "good reason" to suspect the Justice Department's use of the statute will "serve to chill political speech and expression on the eve of one of the most consequential events in American life – the election of the next President of the United States."

Pattis told Newsweek his client expects to hear in the fall if the Supreme Court will hear the case.

---

Here is the text from an appellate decision from January 2022 denying his release

quote:

---

The evidence proffered by the government shows that, over the course of two and a half hours on January 6, 2021, appellant repeatedly pushed, punched, and kicked at police officers defending the Lower West Terrace entrance to the Capitol building. He also slammed a door against one officer's head and struck other officers first with a stolen riot shield and later with a metal baseball bat.

---

quote:

---

As we explained in Munchel, "those who actually assaulted police officers . . . are in a different category of dangerousness than those who cheered on the violence or entered the Capitol after others cleared the way." Munchel, 991 F.3d at 1284.

---

quote:

---

After January 6, appellant boasted about his conduct, advocated taking up arms against the government, and attempted to organize militias for future acts of violence.

---

Bad hombre

quote:

---

Did you ever get to see all the videos of J6 that they said they would release? Me either.

---

No but that's irrelevant to this discussion.

quote:

---

They hope people like you keep throwing out the same pictures to make it look catastrophic

---

No I'm just giving evidence of the type of person who deserved to be prosecuted.

I've never argued these people were involved in some sort of insurrection or were trying to overthrow the government.

quote:

---

Wait, are you saying FEDs weren’t there?

---

No. Never said that.

There aren't enough federal officers in the field in the DC region to compromise the population I posted.

quote:

---

The evidence proffered by the government shows that,

---

Good job, bootlicker.

I mean, if the State says he did it....

I told you to post evidence, not what the State claims to be evidence.

Your assertion was such that you would have people believe you've done some sort of independent research.

BTW, coerced after the fact, strongarmed "admissions" aren't evidence, bootlicker.

quote:

---

He will now do what he always does, shite on the chessboard then strut around like he won the game

---

quote:

---

The evidence proffered by the government shows that, over the course of two and a half hours on January 6, 2021, appellant repeatedly pushed, punched, and kicked at police officers defending the Lower West Terrace entrance to the Capitol building. He also slammed a door against one officer's head and struck other officers first with a stolen riot shield and later with a metal baseball bat

---

quote:

---

"Counsel for petitioner does not oppose this further extension."

---

Thanks. He's working on his future career right now and casting himself as a martyr. He'll be a wealthy influencer when he gets out.