First felony sentencing for Jan 6th DC riot. How does it compare to the 2020 riots?

[Stuart Galbraith]

41 minutes ago, Ivanhoe said:

Do you have a photo of this?

 

 

[nitflegal]

2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Fine, so throw any Antifa rioter a 20 year stretch. Im nothing if not equal opportunities. 😁

The problem I have is that every time I drop in this thread, many of you intelligent, well meaning individuals seem to think think that because you have the impression the 'other guys', whom ever they might be,  somehow got a light sentence, then it justifies these guys getting one too. It does not. Anyone who tries to knobble democracy, either side of the Isle, needs to start geting crucified. I dont care if they are far right, far left, Antifa, the Klu Klux Klan or the Richard Nixon Appreciation society. I dont care, I really dont.

I would further add, lest somehow Ryan or anyone else get the impression im being judgemental, Im not judging any of you for holding this opinion. Im just in complete incredulity you wall want to start handing out get monopoly cards for people who walked in with ropes and Nazi symbology and chanted the intent to murder your elected representives, not to mention attempt to murder policemen. I dont care who they are or what the cause is, its fucking wrong.

Nitflegal you are minimizing the riot. You dont think you are, you are im sure a very level headed, very responsible member of the community. But you have bought into the narrative that just because one group fucks with your political system, these guys can too. No they shouldnt.

Yes, justice is blind. Thats what you should be calling for. And if it isnt, complain about it, dont call for going easy on people who are gone just as far off the reservation.

These are probably very untypical views for an American lefty to hold but Im neither American nor typical, im sure you noticed.

No disrespect intended like.

No disrespect taken.  I would agree with you, at least to an extent, that I am minimizing the riots.  I don't feel I was when they happened but I have certainly become more forgiving of the vast majority of the protesters as I've watched the difference in treatment not only of them but the overt use of them to allow federal agencies to target me and people like me.  I think I take your point that you feel that Antifa rioters should be treated just as harshly and were that the case I don't think that you would be disagreeing with many of us here; we'd be in lockstep together.  The issue is that for many, myself included, the Jan 6 rioters have become a symbol of the stark difference in treatment between the two opposing sides in American politics and culture.  Rioters on the left who support my political enemies (and that's a longer topic as I can't call them adversaries anymore, not when they have directly targeted me, threatened my daughters by name, and have caused harm to members of my family) will simply not ever be treated the same as people on my political side.  Ever.  Our vice president financially supported the people burning down our cities while that same person sends federal law enforcement after people on my side who have broken no laws.  

As I said, I and many others are at the lowest common denominator level of assessments; however the left is treated has to be the way the right is treated and appeals to focusing on a specific incident will no longer wash.  In this case it is exacerbated by the fact that a local police officer who has his skull caved in with a brick or is partially blinded for life gets no hearings, nobody cares while a federal officer protecting our servant class (for that is what our officials are supposed to be, we hired them, they are working for us and we can fire them when we don't like their performance.  Not that this is how we work now. . .)  get to cry on capital hill so that the vast resources of the federal government can attack law abiding people who don't support our regime and stutterer in chief.  

Here is where we simply can't agree together I think.  You are are looking at the event itself in isolation as a terrible event and making your judgements accordingly.  That's a reasonable approach.  Me an my ilk are looking at the event based on how it is being used far more broadly and how after kid gloves for leftist rioters for years (they literally seceded from the union) my side acts stupidly in the same manner once and the participants get hammered and are used as a weapon against my family and pollical side. Our reference points are simply dramatically different.

[rmgill]

2 hours ago, Ivanhoe said:

Do you have a photo of this?

 

Penfold would be very upset to realize that there's 'fascist' iconography already in the building. 

http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/img/iy4f1ec29b.jpg

[rmgill]

1 hour ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

 

You don't think that perhaps he's opposed to the idea of authoritarian death camps and the double speak around them?

I have a friend who has a Che-Guvara t-shirt. It shows Che with a bullet hole in his head. Is that a communist t-shirt or an anticommunist t-shirt? 

Do you think someone walking around with an INGSOC T-shirt or mask is endorsing the concepts in 1984 or warning against it? 

Edited July 31, 2021 by rmgill

[rmgill]

The left is big on who gets bail or not based on the crimes. Is this a good benchmark to reference? 

2 Brooklyn attorneys granted bail in NYPD firebombing case

Two Brooklyn attorneys have been granted bail on federal charges in the firebombing of a New York City police vehicle amid demonstrations over the weekend triggered by the police killing of George Floyd in Minnesota

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/brooklyn-attorneys-granted-bail-nypd-firebombing-case-71006940


Compare with this one....

What about justice for this Capitol rioter?
https://nypost.com/2021/02/17/what-about-justice-for-this-capitol-rioter-devine/

Quote

 

He turned himself in to Arkansas police two days after the riot, and was charged with entering a restricted building, violent entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds, and theft of “public property,” aka the envelope. 

...
 

A week later, after hearing from seven character witnesses, Arkansas magistrate Erin Wiedemann refused the government’s demand that he be held without bail until trial. 

She ordered him released on $5,000 bail, and his wife, Tammy Newburn, was to pick him up the next day. But prosecutors swiftly appealed and, that night, a judge in DC, Chief Judge Beryl Howell, ruled he remain in jail. 

He was whisked away to a federal prison in Oklahoma and later moved to DC with others from around the country who have been charged over the Jan. 6 riot. 
 

He fired his, lawyer and is currently unrepresented and broke. 

Veteran New York criminal-defense lawyer Steven Metcalf, representing 25-year-old Jake Lang, who is facing federal riot charges, says he never has seen such heavy-handed treatment of defendants outside of “international drug-kingpin clients.” 

 

 

[rmgill]

But John Earl Sullivan is released without bail. 

https://thefederalist.com/2021/01/17/federal-judge-releases-blm-capitol-rioter-without-bail/

It sure does seem like there's not a very consistent standard...or perhaps there is. The standard is that if you align left there's more mercy by the courts in DC/New York. 

Edited July 31, 2021 by rmgill

[BansheeOne]

24 minutes ago, nitflegal said:

Me an my ilk are looking at the event based on how it is being used far more broadly and how after kid gloves for leftist rioters for years (they literally seceded from the union) my side acts stupidly in the same manner once and the participants get hammered and are used as a weapon against my family and pollical side. Our reference points are simply dramatically different.

Have you looked at the complaints by the Left how they and their ilk were hammered by a politicized legal system I referenced in my last post? They sound suspiciously similar to yours, though different in the details - the folks who claim they were charged for attacking police even though the latter reported no injuries; that they were jailed for participating in a peaceful protest with bail set at an unattainable 100,000 Dollar due to previous unlawful assembly offenses and only released on the condition they don’t take part in further demonstrations, effectively signing away their First Amendment rights; that they got hit with interstate felony charges for throwing a bottle of beer made in Mexico, or vandalizing a police car made in Canada, facing up to life in prison; and of course, that the Capitol rioters weren't detained as quickly and frequently in the first place, and released much more easily because prosecutors didn't show the same creativity in charging them. 

There are certainly different reference points at play here, because they are fed to the opposing camps by their respective filter bubbles, which tell them there's a witch hunt on for their own people while the other side is handed a get-out-of-jail-free card. But from comparing the whining by either about who is getting the most unfair deal, I have to conclude they're in fact being treated pretty much the same. 

[BansheeOne]

58 minutes ago, rmgill said:

You don't think that perhaps he's opposed to the idea of authoritarian death camps and the double speak around them?

I have to say that absent the equivalent of your bullet hole in Che's head - rather, in fact, a halting translation of "work shall make you free" added to the overall impression, and apparently "staff" printed on the back - I'd really have to delude myself to arrive at that tortured conclusion as an excuse. That's before we come to the point that the guy has been reported to have long been quite vocal about his beliefs. 

He was released without bail after an initial appearance before a magistrate, BTW. 

[rmgill]

4 hours ago, BansheeOne said:

Have you looked at the complaints by the Left how they and their ilk were hammered by a politicized legal system I referenced in my last post? They sound suspiciously similar to yours, though different in the details - the folks who claim they were charged for attacking police even though the latter reported no injuries; that they were jailed for participating in a peaceful protest with bail set at an unattainable 100,000 Dollar

In the US System, you don't have to hand them $100,000 in cash. You have to provide 10% to a bail bondsman, that can be assets, vehicles what not. He then posts the bond and he keeps it if you show or not. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bail_in_the_United_States#Types_of_bail

4 hours ago, BansheeOne said:

There are certainly different reference points at play here, because they are fed to the opposing camps by their respective filter bubbles, which tell them there's a witch hunt on for their own people while the other side is handed a get-out-of-jail-free card. But from comparing the whining by either about who is getting the most unfair deal, I have to conclude they're in fact being treated pretty much the same. 

You'd expect that someone like John Earl Sullivan would have the same bail terms though for the same charges? Does he? 

Edited July 31, 2021 by rmgill

[Stuart Galbraith]

This John Earl Sullivan?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/capitol-rioter-john-sullivan-pleads-not-guilty-wants-90k-back-from-doj/ar-AAKpETs

In court filings, the DOJ says Sullivan made more than $90,000 by selling that footage – which includes the only publicly released video of the fatal shooting of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt. Babbitt was shot by a U.S. Capitol Police officer while attempting to breach a barricade into the Speaker’s Lobby.

Last week, Sullivan’s attorney filed a motion asking the court to reverse the government’s seizure of those funds, arguing that his client needs them to pay his rent and that they are not the proceeds of criminal activity.

 

Well in absolute fairness, he probably isnt going to have to worry about the rent for a while.

 

 

[rmgill]

If the Federal Attorneys screwed Sullivan's case up so much that the judge granted a release without bail, how do you think they're going to do with the actual case? 

[Markus Becker]

2/3 want the BLM riots investigated vs 49% the 06/01 riot. 

https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/partner_surveys/two_thirds_of_voters_want_congress_to_investigate_2020_riots

[BansheeOne]

13 hours ago, rmgill said:

In the US System, you don't have to hand them $100,000 in cash. You have to provide 10% to a bail bondsman, that can be assets, vehicles what not. He then posts the bond and he keeps it if you show or not. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bail_in_the_United_States#Types_of_bail

You'd expect that someone like John Earl Sullivan would have the same bail terms though for the same charges? Does he? 

Well yes, but my point is that the complaints about unfair treatment from either side sound suspiciously similar. I don't in fact trust many of the claims brought up in the older "Guardian" article, which is remarkably one-sided in not giving the take of authorities on those personal statements; though I have to say the application of interstate felony charges is indeed a disquietening kind of creative, and seems a matter of public record. As noted, the same appears true regarding solitary confinement for Capitol rioters, given that you have notable left-wing Democrat senators criticizing it.

But both issues being highlighted again contributes to the similarity of complaints about politicized prosecution by both camps. In the end, fact-based comparison will only be possible after most proceedings on either complex have concluded and we have a comprehensive picture of legal consequences in both. Something which unfortunately seems very slow going, given that so far we have only one conviction on one side, and just half a dozen I can find on the other.

As for Sullivan, I thought the locally accepted narrative was that he was a BLM Antifa undercover agent provocateur, so how does his case count as an example for better treatment of the Left?

Edited August 1, 2021 by BansheeOne

[Ivanhoe]

22 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

 

That's terrible, and yet another data point that this thing wasn't planned by adults.

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

Id like to know who would sell shit like that anyway, Aryan Apparel? 😄

[BansheeOne]

Apparently it was sold via Etsy, which promptly banned the maker after the Capitol images raised some attention. 

Quote

MON JAN 11, 2021 / 10:43 AM EST

Online retailer removes 'Camp Auschwitz' T-shirt after US Capitol rampage

Jan 11 (Reuters) - Online retailer Etsy Inc has removed a T-shirt with a 'Camp Auschwitz' slogan from its website after images of a man wearing a sweatshirt with the same words during the assault on the U.S. Capitol last week prompted a protest by the Auschwitz Memorial.

The Auschwitz-Birkenau Memorial and Museum said the slogan was disrespectful to the memory of all those who perished in the death camp, which was built by Nazi German occupiers in southern Poland during World War Two. It is now preserved as a museum.

[...] 

https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-election-auschwitz-etsy/online-retailer-removes-camp-auschwitz-t-shirt-after-us-capitol-rampage-idINL8N2JM1TD?edition-redirect=uk

Mind, you can easily find Soviet-themed shirts of comparable taste online. Though some "Gulag" ones seem to reference a "Call of Duty: Warzone" setting. 

[R011]

Capitalists have no problem making money selling Communist imagery - like Ernesto Guevara pictures.  I dare say some of the same people will sell Nazi Tshirts if there's a buck in it.  Not that Tshirt manufacture needs much more than some shirts , a silkscreen, and some paint.

[Stuart Galbraith]

Oh dear. This is all making me feel deeply akward wearing my Panamaka when walking the dog.😏

[RETAC21]

23 minutes ago, R011 said:

Capitalists have no problem making money selling Communist imagery - like Ernesto Guevara pictures.  I dare say some of the same people will sell Nazi Tshirts if there's a buck in it.  Not that Tshirt manufacture needs much more than some shirts , a silkscreen, and some paint.

T shirts made in Commie China!

[17thfabn]

5 hours ago, BansheeOne said:

Well yes, but my point is that the complaints about unfair treatment from either side sound suspiciously similar. 

I'm not on either side. antifa and other anarchist f.t.s are not my side.

The idiots who stormed the capital aren't my side.

I don't think the capitol rioters are being over charged.

I do think that the criminals that have looted and worse during the 2020 riots have been treated way to leniently. Often local authorities have turned a blind eye to the mobs.

It is perfectly acceptable to PEAEFULLY protest.

You start throwing rocks, looting, trespassing and hurting people you deserve to be in jail. It doesn't matter if you belong to blm, antifa, or the radical wing of the moose lodge you belong in jail.

[Stuart Galbraith]

1 hour ago, 17thfabn said:

I'm not on either side. antifa and other anarchist f.t.s are not my side.

The idiots who stormed the capital aren't my side.

I don't think the capitol rioters are being over charged.

I do think that the criminals that have looted and worse during the 2020 riots have been treated way to leniently. Often local authorities have turned a blind eye to the mobs.

It is perfectly acceptable to PEAEFULLY protest.

You start throwing rocks, looting, trespassing and hurting people you deserve to be in jail. It doesn't matter if you belong to blm, antifa, or the radical wing of the moose lodge you belong in jail.

I completely agree with you.

[BansheeOne]

Quote

Scott Fairlamb pleads guilty to assaulting officer January 6, the first Capitol riot defendant to plead guilty to assault

BY CASSIDY MCDONALD, CLARE HYMES

AUGUST 6, 2021 / 2:28 PM / CBS NEWS

A New Jersey man who was filmed punching an officer in the head entered a guilty plea Friday, becoming the first defendant to plead guilty to assaulting an officer during the January 6 Capitol riot.

Scott Fairlamb pleaded guilty to two crimes — obstruction of an official proceeding and aiding and abetting, and assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers. In exchange for his plea, he faces a recommended sentence of 41 to 51 months in prison and agreed to cooperate with the FBI through an interview and pay $2,000 in restitution.

Fairlamb's is one of the first guilty pleas to involve a violent incident during the Capitol attack. Although Fairlamb is at least the 32nd Capitol riot defendant to plead guilty, he is just the seventh to plead guilty to a felony, and the first to plead guilty to a charge of assaulting an officer.

Fairlamb had previously been indicted on 12 counts — which included civil disorder, obstruction of an official proceeding and engaging in physical violence in a restricted area.

Fairlamb — who prosecutors said is a former mixed martial arts fighter, gym owner and bar bouncer — was ordered detained after his January arrest, after prosecutors cited the gravity of his alleged offense and his lengthy criminal history, which includes at least two prior assault convictions.

Authorities built their case against Fairlamb with the help of at least four tipsters, who shared videos, some taken by Fairlamb himself, that painted a picture of his conduct throughout the day January 6 as he climbed scaffolding, shouted at officers and entered the Capitol building.

In one video, prosecutors said, Fairlamb can be seen shoving and punching an officer on the West Front of the Capitol. In the video, Fairlamb can be seen taunting a line of officers who prosecutors said were trying to make their way through the heavy crowd outside the Capitol building. 

A media coalition, including CBS News, later received access to police body-worn video from the incident that was played in court as evidence. In the footage, Fairlamb can be seen approaching the officers and screaming: "Are you an American? Act like a f***ing one! … You guys have no idea what the f*** you're doing. Not one single f***ing idea." 

Prosecutors said one officer, attempting to catch up with his colleagues, placed his hand on Fairlamb to move him out of the way. Fairlamb could be heard on video saying, "Don't touch me, bro," before shoving the officer so hard that he fell into others in the crowd, prosecutors said. 

The officer can then be seen putting his arm up defensively as Fairlamb punches him on the front of his helmet. 

Prosecutors wrote in a filing arguing against his release, "His actions show a capacity and wanton willingness to violate the law, to engage in acts of disorder and violence, and to harm others, including uniformed law enforcement." 

Prosecutors said Fairlamb also breached the Capitol building on January 6 and came within seconds of encountering fleeing senators, entering the building just eight seconds after Officer Eugene Goodman ushered Senator Mitt Romney away from the nearby crowd.

According to prosecutors' court filings, Fairlamb could be seen earlier in the day climbing scaffolding outside the building and screaming, "We ain't f****n' leaving either." 

Later, he was filmed picking up a collapsible baton near the skirmish line with police on the Capitol West Terrace. In one video posted to his own Facebook account, prosecutors said Fairlamb could be seen carrying the baton and saying, "What Patriots do? We f****n' disarm them and then we storm f****n' the Capitol." 

Shortly after, prosecutors said, Fairlamb entered the Capitol building with a baton in hand and left the building coughing after chemical agents were set off inside.

On January 6, prosecutors say Fairlamb posted to Facebook: "How far are you willing to go to defend our Constitution? Made the trip solo, looking to meet my fellow Patriots who share the same beliefs. Put up or shut up."

When arguing against his pretrial release in March, prosecutors said Fairlamb had "violent impulses" and had demonstrated a disregard for the law, noting that he opened his gym in May 2020 in defiance of the New Jersey governor's stay-at-home orders.

[...] 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/scott-fairlamb-guilty-plea-january-6-capitol-riot/

[bojan]

On 8/1/2021 at 7:43 PM, Stuart Galbraith said:

I completely agree with you.

You did not in 2014.

[Stuart Galbraith]

7 hours ago, bojan said:

You did not in 2014.

Is that some kind of  barbed reference to Ukraine? Because you can come right out and say it you know. 

So when a Government is corrupt, when its using violence and intimindation against its people to remain in power, in those specific circumstances when the Government has proven itself unworthy of its duties and is unwilling to remove itself, yes then im in favour of  strong protest, even insurrection at the far end of the scale. Reluctantly, but of necessity, yes, I can see it might become necessary.

Ive yet to see a single Democratic nation in Europe or North America that has yet passed that litmus test, whatever some of more excitable members may say about the United States, or the EU may say about Poland and Hungary. That Americans talk about insurrection any time someone suggests its a good idea to wear a mask or take a vaccine, suggests their hypersensitivity on such matters.

Alright, this one is on you. Was the resistance to Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, the PRC justified? What about Burma? What about Libya? And if it isnt justified, just what are you willing to tolerate in the interests of good order?

 

Edited August 7, 2021 by Stuart Galbraith

[bojan]

2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

...So when a Government is corrupt, when its using violence and intimindation against its people to remain in power, in those specific circumstances when the Government has proven itself unworthy of its duties and is unwilling to remove itself, yes then im in favour of  strong protest, even insurrection at the far end of the scale. Reluctantly, but of necessity, yes, I can see it might become necessary.

That government was legally elected by the majority of voters, and extremists among protestors (Right Sector) started throwing molotovs first, for a sole reason to get police overreaction. Which they did, and none blamed them...

Point is, as always, you have two standards that you apply when it is convenient to you. But that comes as surprise to nobody those days.