|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Mar 29, 2024 0:34:22 GMT
I don’t know if Trump spoke at the funeral but he was an invited guest along with Mayor Adams. As far as Biden going about his business, many NYPD officers were unable to attend their slain brother’s funeral because they had to work security and crowd control for Biden’s star-studded fundraiser at Radio City. it says he spoke at the wake.. |
|
|
|
Post by onelasttime on Mar 29, 2024 0:34:34 GMT
I don’t know if Trump spoke at the funeral but he was an invited guest along with Mayor Adams. As far as Biden going about his business, many NYPD officers were unable to attend their slain brother’s funeral because they had to work security and crowd control for Biden’s star-studded fundraiser at Radio City. So you think something planned way in advanced should be cancelled? The fact is a lot of officers couldn’t attend because they had to work regardless of the fund raiser. Maybe you think they should have shut the entire city down so all the officers could have gone to the funeral. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 29, 2024 0:39:20 GMT
Even a Fox host recognizes the true contrast of today's events. contrast
Trump is in New York today trying to exploit someone’s murder for his political benefit.
Biden is in New York today raising millions for his campaign with two former presidents while broke Trump can’t even get members of his former Cabinet to endorse him.
That’s the contrast.stark contrast
Radio City Music Hall event |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 29, 2024 0:40:58 GMT
Trump did not attend the funeral for Capitol police officer Brian Sicknick or offer support for the 140 officers injured during the insurrection. Trump praises the insurrectionists who are responsible for their injuries as patriots, hostages and political prisoners and promised to pardon them. Trump also amplified a call for prosecuting Capitol police officers for their heroic actions on Jan 6. Trump referred to the officer that shot Ashli Babbitt as a thug, a murderer and a coward. Trump has called federal law enforcement corrupt, crooked, and a threat to democracy. He equated the FBI with the Gestapo and said there are fascists in the bureau. Attendance at one funeral does not cancel or make up for all of Trump's other statements and actions that are clearly not in support of the police. Don't pretend he backs the blue. pardonsTrump only cares about himself |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Mar 29, 2024 0:44:39 GMT
^^^^......^^^^
At the highest level.. but of course NOT the Capitol Police or the DC Metro PD!!
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 29, 2024 0:47:12 GMT
In 2020... YES, you do... ABC NEWS "The last day to vote in the 2020 general election was Nov. 3. But ballots may not be counted for several day S, if not weeks, after that date, experts said." "Deadlines for receiving mail-in ballots also extend past Nov. 3 in several states, all but making it a given that votes will be recorded in the dayS or even weeks after the election."Trump called 2 months after the election. 11,000 votes are not legitimately found 2 months later, after 3 ballot counts. Trump was not asking them to "find" legal ballots. You're starting to sound like MTG lost ballots
find votesDonald Trump: “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state.”
Brad Raffensperger: “There weren't the votes to find. We had checked out all the allegations, so we knew that we had the right results.
Sara Murray: “By this point, Raffensperger had overseen three separate ballot counts, conducted many other reviews of the process, and investigated more than 250 claims of voter fraud. The fact remained Trump had lost the state of Georgia.”
Brad Raffensperger: “All I knew is we had to lean into the law and into the facts. And we had both on our side.” |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Mar 29, 2024 1:11:09 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Mar 29, 2024 1:20:42 GMT
A reminder that, no matter what the right wing says, violent crime in NYC is substantially down year over year. Likely due in part to the efforts of NYPD. www.nyc.gov/site/nypd/news/p00099/nypd-january-2024-citywide-crime-statisticsAnd another reminder that crime stats don't care whether the person was convicted, how much time they spent in prison, etc. Crime stats are based on incidents known to law enforcement regardless of the outcome of prosecution or if anyone was even arrested. So crime being down has nothing to do with downgrading felonies as some people claim. The incidents known to law enforcement are down, period. Fun fact: the reason major city law enforcement generally declines to enforce federal immigration law is because to do so makes immigrants feel unsafe reporting crimes, for fear the reporter may be imprisoned or deported. Law enforcement wants people to report crimes so they can get criminals off the street and see immigrant criminals deported. But supposedly this is a "progressive" tactic. |
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Mar 29, 2024 2:52:50 GMT
I don’t know if Trump spoke at the funeral but he was an invited guest along with Mayor Adams. As far as Biden going about his business, many NYPD officers were unable to attend their slain brother’s funeral because they had to work security and crowd control for Biden’s star-studded fundraiser at Radio City. So apparently today wasn’t the actual funeral, but just the wake. We will see if Trump actually appears at the funeral itself. If the family wants him there, then so be it. But I don’t think he’s capable of adding anything of quality to the service. I’m glad they invited the mayor, too. There are 36,000 NYPD officers. That’s more (by a lot) than the entire population of my small city. They can’t all attend the funeral. Some of them will need to be doing their jobs instead. Please don’t be the kind of person who would blame President Biden for planning a large event months in advance that happens to take place during this time of sadness in a city of over 8 million people. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 29, 2024 3:59:42 GMT
Trump knew his supporters were armed www.npr.org/2022/06/28/1108387054/trump-said-he-knew-jan-6-crowd-members-had-weapons-ex-white-house-aide-testifiedGRISALES: Right. The committee shared police radio traffic from the day of the attack, documenting reports of individuals at the rally carrying weapons such as assault-style rifles.UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Underneath the hooded jacket, complainants both saw a stock of an AR-15. He's going to be with a group of individuals, about 5'8", 5'9", skinny white males, brown cowboy boots. They had Glock-style pistols in their waistband.GRISALES: And this followed what Hutchinson told the committee was repeated warnings to the Trump White House that violence was expected. For example, she testified that Trump knew that members of the crowd had weapons, but that he didn't care. He said that they were not there to hurt him, and they could march to the Capitol after the rally.www.nytimes.com/2022/06/28/us/politics/trump-meadows-jan-6-surprise-hearing.htmlCassidy Hutchinson told the House committee investigating the riot that President Donald J. Trump did not care about the potential for violence because his supporters were not there to attack him.Drawing from conversations she said she overheard in the West Wing and others contemporaneously relayed to her by top officials, Ms. Hutchinson, a 26-year-old who was an aide to Mark Meadows, Mr. Trump’s final chief of staff, provided crucial details about what the former president was doing and saying before and during the riot. She painted a portrait of an unhinged president obsessed with clinging to power and appearing strong, and willing to tolerate violence as a result — as long as it was not directed at him.“They’re not here to hurt me,” she testified that Mr. Trump said as he demanded that security checkpoints be removed outside his rally on the Ellipse on Jan. 6, knowing that many of his supporters were armed and threatening violence. “Take the f-ing mags away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here.”More than 1 Trump supporter was armed on January 6 www.politico.com/news/2023/04/17/jan-6-defendant-witness-00092475When Chris Alberts arrived on the grounds of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, then-President Donald Trump was still speaking to his supporters more than a mile away.
And as he told a jury on Monday, the entire time he was at the Capitol, he was armed with a concealed firearm and 25 rounds of ammunition, including hollow-point bullets.
www.nytimes.com/2024/03/08/us/politics/john-banuelos-jan-6-gun-charges.htmlProsecutors Charge Man With Firing Shots Outside the Capitol on Jan. 6The charges once again laid bare one of the most persistent myths about the attack promoted by pro-Trump politicians and media figures: that none of the rioters were armed.But the Justice Department’s sprawling investigation of Jan. 6 has revealed that several people at the Capitol were carrying firearms that day.
Guy Wesley Reffitt, a militiaman from Texas, was wearing a pistol on his hip when he led a charge of rioters up a staircase on the west side of the Capitol, according to testimony at his trial — the first of dozens to have taken place in Washington connected to the events of Jan. 6. Mr. Reffitt was ultimately convicted of a gun charge and other felonies and was sentenced to more than seven years in prison.
Among the other rioters who were carrying firearms on Jan. 6 are Christopher Alberts, a former Virginia National Guard member who charged the police outside the Capitol with a loaded 9-millimeter pistol, prosecutors say. Mr. Alberts was convicted of multiple felony charges and sentenced to seven years in prison.
A rioter named Mark Mazza brought two guns to the Capitol — a .40-caliber semiautomatic pistol and a Taurus revolver loaded with shotgun shells and hollow-point bullets, prosecutors say. Mr. Mazza was sentenced to five years in prison.
www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/07/08/jan6-defendants-guns/Some of the startling revelations of the recent blockbuster Jan. 6 House committee hearing came in snippets of police radio traffic captured during President Donald Trump’s rally on the Ellipse and from Trump’s purported response to being told there were armed protesters just outside a secured area.
Sign up for Fact Checker, our weekly review of what's true, false or in-between in politics.
The chatter included reports of a man with an AR-15 in a tree on Constitution Avenue who was accompanied by two men with pistols on their hips. Another officer radioed, “I’ve got three men walking down the street in fatigues carrying AR-15s, copy, at 14th and Independence.”
The full picture of how many among the crowd were armed before the riot occurred is unclear, but court records, trial testimony and accounts from police officers and rioters have supplied growing evidence that multiple people brought firearms to Washington for Jan. 6, 2021. Six men were arrested that day for having guns in the vicinity of the U.S. Capitol, and a seventh who arrived after the riot ended was arrested the following day.
In video evidence played at his trial, Guy Reffitt of Wylie, Tex., said that as he stood near the front of the mob on the west side of the Capitol, he counted eight firearms carried by five people.
Reffitt said that his count included his .40-caliber pistol and his Texas companion’s .45-caliber handgun, five firearms carried by a couple he met at the Capitol and a .22-caliber weapon carried by a woman who stopped to help him after he was hit with bear spray. Reffitt was found guilty in March of encouraging one of the first surges by the mob to overwhelm police while carrying his semiautomatic handgun in a hip holster.
About 825 people have been charged federally in the Jan. 6 riot. Most have been charged with misdemeanor-type trespassing counts. Although only a handful have been charged with firearms violations, at least 121 people have been charged with using or carrying dangerous weapons, and about 20 have been found guilty, a Washington Post database shows. Scores of police officers reported being attacked that day with chemical spray, stun guns, flagpoles and clubs. A Florida man who hurled a fire extinguisher, a plank and a long pole at officers was sentenced to more than five years in prison in December, the longest sentence of any defendant so far.
Last month, Mark Andrew Mazza, 57, of Shelbyville, Ind., pleaded guilty to assaulting an officer with a baton and carrying a pistol without a license. Mazza told authorities that he lost his .45-caliber Taurus revolver loaded with shotgun shells and hollow-point bullets on the Capitol grounds during the mob fighting before entering the Capitol building.
In addition, Mark Ibrahim of Orange County, Calif., then a Drug Enforcement Administration agent, posed for photos with his DEA badge and a pistol inside his waistband on the Capitol grounds on Jan. 6, prosecutors have said.I stand corrected on the only 1 person had a gun. Corrected to 7 people arrested for having a gun. One of which was locked in his car somewhere else and another who wasn't even there when it was happening. It was a terrible day and should not have happened the way it did. I still think it was not "an armed insurrection" or the majority would have had firearms. Only 1 person was shot. An UNARMED protester shot by Capitol police and no one shot back. I don't believe that would have happened if they had showed up actually looking for an excuse to violently overthrow the government. Cassidy Hutchinson, who gave her Katie Britt like testimony of AGAIN what someone ELSE supposedly told her happened in The Beast? Her testimony that was debunked by the driver himself? I don't believe anything she has to say. They planned and constructed a gallows and noose. Do you really think they had peaceful intentions when they were shouting "Hang Mike Pence"? A man shouted execute the traitors! Does that sound peaceful? Two pipe bombs were planted. They openly planned for violence and organized logistics on social media sites. I can't tell if you're serious or if you really believe this kind of false Republican talking points that are easily disputed with well documented facts. Or if you're just trying to provoke and start arguments. I'm leaning towards the latter at this point. www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/pro-trump-oath-keepers-sought-violent-overthrow-of-government-on-jan-6-prosecutors-tell-courtWASHINGTON (AP) — For weeks leading up to Jan. 6, 2021, Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes and four associates discussed using violence to overturn the results of the 2020 election, and when rioters started storming the Capitol they saw an opportunity to do it, a federal prosecutor told jurors on Friday as the seditious conspiracy case wound toward a close.
Rhodes and his co-defendants repeatedly called for “violent overthrow” of the U.S. government and sprang into action on Jan. 6, she said.
Evidence presented by prosecutors shows Rhodes and his co-defendants discussing the prospect of violence and the need to keep Biden out of the White House in the weeks leading up to Jan. 6, before stashing a cache of weapons referred to as a “quick reaction force” at a Virginia hotel across the Potomac River.
The prosecutor sought to rebut suggestions that Rhodes’ rhetoric was simply bluster, telling jurors that his messages weren’t “ranting and raving” but were “deadly serious.”
“The way they have appointed themselves to be above the law is why they are here today,” she said. “The sense of entitlement that led to frustration followed by rage and then violence – that is the story of this conspiracy.” |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 29, 2024 4:14:07 GMT
Donald Trump did not accept the results of the election. He led a coordinated effort on a large scale encompassing all levels of government to try to overturn the election. When those efforts failed, Trump resorted to disrupting the electoral vote certification. Trump incited a planned, violent and armed insurrection. www.npr.org/2022/06/09/1103913507/the-planning-behind-the-jan-6-insurrection-went-far-deeper-than-it-initially-seeGROSS: When you stand back and look at the big picture, you see that just about every facet of government was involved or pressured to be involved in the effort to overturn the election - the White House, the White House chief of staff, lawyers that were allies of President Trump, members of Congress, the Department of Homeland Security, the military, state houses, election officials as well as far-right radical groups. What am I leaving out?
BROADWATER: I think you did a good job of summing everything up. The effort by Donald Trump and his allies to try to overturn the results of the 2020 election was such a sprawling and diffuse effort that it literally did range from local election board officials all the way up to challenges at some of the highest courts in the country. It involved discussions atop the Justice Department about firing, you know, the acting attorney general. It involved attempts to consider seizing voting machines by various federal agencies. It involved high-level discussions among the military about whether the National Guard would be deployed. Donald Trump tried just about everything he could think of to stay in power until ultimately, you know, a mob of his supporters came crashing into the Capitol that dark day two months ago.
GROSS: The storming of the Capitol is not an isolated event. It's the most dramatic, most documented and most visible and physically threatening part of the larger story, but it's just one part. So how do you see the insurrection as fitting into the larger months-long story and the attempt to overthrow the results of the election?
BROADWATER: Well, it's the culmination of everything that came before it. And basically, the Trump campaign had run out of options at that point. At first, they had tried to keep the former president in power through the courts. You know, right away on election night, Donald Trump announces that he won the election, and - despite what the votes say. And so they try lawsuit after lawsuit to try to keep him in power. And that's the legitimate way to do it, right? I mean, these lawsuits were very dubious, and they were bogus. But that is the proper remedy to try to contest an election - is to go to the courts. And they try some 60-plus times and fail each time. Each one of these suits is thrown out. After that happens, they try schemes that are increasingly at odds with norms and standards in the law. So they then come up with this idea that, well, if the courts won't go along with this, it's because they haven't seen the evidence of fraud that we believe exists. And in order to get that evidence of fraud, we need to take control of the voting machines because there must be fraud. So they strategize with a number of theories for how they can take control of various voting machines. Obviously, this is a very dangerous and frightening plan. And at first, we believed it was mainly pushed by people with extreme views. But through reporting, we've been able to determine that Donald Trump himself actually entertained this plan and checked with three different agencies to see if they would carry it out. And each one rejected these attempts to seize voting machines. And so that plan sort of dies in the water once he can't get any of his agency heads to go along with it.
BROADWATER: So, yes, after the Trump campaign realizes they cannot win through the courts or through seizing voting machines, they have to come up with a different strategy to keep Donald Trump in power, as that's their goal. And one idea they settle on is to have their lawyers fan out across the country and contact Republicans in seven different battleground states that were all won by Joe Biden and convince them to meet and certify slates of electors for President Trump instead of Joe Biden and then send those slates to the Congress and to the National Archives. But in order for this plan to have any legitimacy, they need the governors of those states or the state legislatures to approve of these slates, to say, yes, in fact, there was a contested election here. We have two slates of electors. We don't know which one is right. Here, Congress, please decide for us.
The problem for Donald Trump is no one's willing to go along with that plan. They do get the fake electors to sign these certificates, but no governor and no legislature is willing to meet to sign off on them. So they don't have any legitimacy once they get to Washington. And that's when Donald Trump becomes, one, enraged at those people who won't go along with it. You know, I recall Governor Kemp of Georgia receiving a lot of ire from the president because he would not acquiesce. But then they have to come up with a different way to try to keep him in power, to say, well, maybe we don't need to get governors to sign off on them; maybe we can just have Vice President Mike Pence accept these fake electors and throw out legitimate votes. And that's when the pressure really turns to Mike Pence.
GROSS: And Pence decides, like, he can't go forward with that. It's not legal. And he decides that after talking with his lawyers and with former Vice President Dan Quayle. And then Trump gets really angry with Pence and even says - as they're chanting, Mike Pence, even says, maybe they should hang Mike Pence. And we don't know what the tone was when he said that, whether he was saying that in a snarky way or, like, I-really-mean-it kind of way. But it is a demonstration of how angry he was. So how does all of this lead to the actual violence, the actual storming of the Capitol, the insurrection on January 6? Like, where does that fit in to the larger story? Like, connect the dots to that explosion.
BROADWATER: Yes. So the only reason to have a crowd assembled in Washington on January 6 is to put pressure on Congress and on Mike Pence specifically to overturn the election. There's never a rally on January 6 any other year. The purpose of that was to bring a crowd to D.C. and to the Capitol. So the very fact that they've assembled this crowd of thousands creates a sort of very hostile political environment where angry people are being told the election was stolen from them, and they're being directed to put pressure on those people inside that building. And Donald Trump directs the crowd to march towards the Capitol that day.
Now, when does it get violent? That is a question of substantial investigation. And how much planning went into the violence? And what we know now is that several militia groups and hundreds of people did, in fact, plan to commit violence that day. There's a lot of testimony that federal prosecutors have. There are a lot of guilty pleas coming out of the various court cases where - there were some people, obviously, who did get caught up with the mob, caught up in the moment. Maybe they didn't come to D.C. that day to commit violence against anyone. But there were people there who did have that plan, and they believed they were carrying out Donald Trump's orders. If you look at - and I believe the January 6 committee, at the hearings, will play this out in great detail.
GROSS: A significant portion of the first hearing will focus on the Proud Boys - of the first public hearing by the House select committee. The Proud Boys are a far-right group. Five members, including the former leader, Enrique Tarrio, were indicted on Monday of seditious conspiracy. What does that mean, and why is it so consequential?
BROADWATER: Well, it gets beyond the idea that this was a spontaneous attack, that it was just a mob that got out of control - people got too excited that day. This gets to, actually, the planning of, essentially, political violence. The one thing that's interesting for me to look at, and I think the committee as well, is the connections that the Proud Boys have to Republican politics, and connecting the violent extremists and the militia groups with the Republican Party and Republican political actors. So for instance, Enrique Tarrio and some of the Proud Boys are members of Latinos for Trump. So they were sort of brought into the Trump campaign as a way to motivate supporters and get certain voting blocs to support the president. At the same time, these same people, according to federal prosecutors, are planning a seditious attack on the government.
So you have - and I think you see a similar thing with the Oath Keepers, where you have the Oath Keepers providing security for Roger Stone, an ally of Donald Trump. And then those same Oath Keepers are seen as part of a very organized force marching into the Capitol that day. So you're seeing an overlap between people in Republican politics and also people as part of these militia or right-wing extremist groups. And I think we're going to see a a lot of exploring and investigation of those themes at these hearings. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 29, 2024 4:49:08 GMT
Yes, the insurrectionists were armed. In addition to the guns, all kinds of other weapons were carried - knives, brass knuckles, tasers, stun guns, pepper spray, baseball bats, and flagpoles. 140 police officers were injured. The injuries included cracked ribs, gouged eyes and shattered spinal disks. At least 110 individuals have been charged with using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily injury to an officer. The insurrections caused $1.5 million in damages to the building. Armed means furnished with weapons and weapons are not limited to just guns. A majority of the insurrectionists carrying firearms is not necessary for the insurrection to be considered armed and violent. www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/armedarmed
1 of 2adjective (1)
1a
: furnished with weapons
an armed guard
also : using or involving a weaponwww.justice.gov/usao-dc/30-months-jan-6-attack-capitolwww.npr.org/2021/03/19/977879589/yes-capitol-rioters-were-armed-here-are-the-weapons-prosecutors-say-they-usedIn the wake of the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, a popular narrative has emerged: that because rioters did not fire guns that day, they were not really "armed."
But a review of the federal charges against the alleged rioters shows that they did come armed, and with a variety of weapons: stun guns, pepper spray, baseball bats and flagpoles wielded as clubs. An additional suspect also allegedly planted pipe bombs by the headquarters of the Democratic and Republican parties the night before the riot and remains at large.www.factcheck.org/2022/01/factchecking-claims-about-the-jan-6-capitol-riot/Some Protesters Were ‘Armed.’ Social media posts also misleadingly claimed the attack on the Capitol was not an “armed” insurrection, citing FBI testimony that no guns were seized from suspects that day. But 23 people were charged with having deadly or dangerous weapons during the assault — including a loaded handgun found on a man arrested on Capitol grounds. Other weapons included baseball bats, chemical sprays, a captured police officer’s riot shield, a crowbar, fire extinguishers and a metal flagpole. In legal terms, “armed” means being in possession of any weapon, not just a gun.
www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/12/19/takeaways-jan-6-committee-report-introduction/Specifically, the report cites a November 2021 document produced by the Capitol Police and says: “Secret Service confiscated a haul of weapons from the 28,000 spectators who did pass through the magnetometers: 242 canisters of pepper spray, 269 knives or blades, 18 brass knuckles, 18 tasers, 6 pieces of body armor, 3 gas masks, 30 batons or blunt instruments, and 17 miscellaneous items like scissors, needles, or screwdrivers.”
And these were just the people who submitted to going through a magnetometer. The report adds: “And thousands of others purposely remained outside the magnetometers, or left their packs outside.” |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 29, 2024 20:42:31 GMT
After January 6, Trump is well aware of what his supporters are willing to do. He is intentionally and deliberately attacking judges, their families, courtroom workers etc. He knows that his attacks could lead to violence, but he doesn't care. He's trying everything to avoid being held accountable. He's trying to intimidate the judges in his cases. Tell me again how Trump backs the blue or supports the police while he's attacking judges and their families. Or tell me how this is even remotely acceptable behavior for the Republican nominee. Republican politicians for the most part have been remarkably silent about Trump's attacks on judges. www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/03/29/trump-judge-attacks-violence/?%20va._1Republican-appointed judges raise alarm over Trump attacks on law Federal D.C. Judge Reggie B. Walton warned Trump’s attacks on hush-money trial judge and others could lead to violence. Reagan, Bush-appointed judges decry Jan. 6 revisionism, threats. A Republican-appointed judge denounced Donald Trump’s social media attacks against the judge presiding over the former president’s hush money trial in Manhattan and his daughter, calling them assaults on the rule of law that could lead to violence and tyranny.
“When judges are threatened, and particularly when their family is threatened, it’s something that’s wrong and should not happen,” U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton, told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins in a live interview Thursday. He added, “It is very troubling because I think it is an attack on the rule of law.”
Walton, who was appointed by presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush to courts in Washington in 1981 and 1991, said “any reasonable, thinking person” would appreciate the impact of Trump’s rhetoric on some followers, intentional or not. The judge recalled how a disgruntled litigant killed the son and wounded the husband of New Jersey federal Judge Esther Salas at her home in a 2020 shooting.
Since late 2020, as Trump began escalating his attacks on the judiciary, serious investigated threats against federal judges have more than doubled, from 224 in 2021 to 457 in 2023, according to the U.S. Marshals Service, as first reported by Reuters. Federal judges in Washington say at least half of trial judges handling cases arising from the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol have received a surge in threats and harassment, including death threats to their homes, with Trump’s election obstruction trial judge, Tanya S. Chutkan, placed under 24-hour protection.
“The rule of rule of law can only be maintained if we have independent judicial officers who are able to do their job and ensure that the laws are in fact enforced and that the laws are applied equally to everybody who appears in our courthouse,” Walton told CNN. He was prompted to speak out of concern for the “future of our country and the future of democracy in our country,” Walton said, “because if we don’t have a viable court system that’s able to function efficiently, then we have tyranny.”
Walton’s remarks came as several federal judges in Washington appointed by Republican presidents have spoken with increasing urgency about Trump’s disregard for historical facts and alarmed at his increasingly graphic and at times violent description of defendants prosecuted in the Jan. 6 riot as “political prisoners” and “hostages” who did nothing wrong.
“In my 37 years on the bench, I cannot recall a time when such meritless justifications of criminal activity have gone mainstream,” U.S District Judge Royce C. Lamberth said in a January sentencing. “I have been dismayed to see distortions and outright falsehoods seep into the public consciousness.”
U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan similarly told a group of Georgetown Law School students in January that false claims that riot defendants were acting like tourists or patriots were destructive rewriting of reality. “There’s a danger that is embedded now in our communities across the country,” Hogan said.
All three judges have warned of a significant increase in the number of threats they and other judges have faced since the Capitol attack, which Walton called “very, very very concerning.”
“I’ve been a judge for over 40 years. And, this is a new phenomenon. I’m not saying that it didn’t happen before, but it was very rare that I would ever receive any type of a threat,” Walton said. “And unfortunately, that is no longer, the case.”
Hogan told law students threats had increased, “no question about it, I think encouraged by the prior president, unfortunately.”
“I would say half our judges have been seriously threatened” regarding their handling of cases related to Trump, Hogan said in a Jan. 22 law school talk. “It makes you nervous.”
A Texas woman was charged with threatening to kill Chutkan shortly after she was assigned Trump’s case last August, leaving a voice-mail message in the judge’s chambers calling Chutkan a racial slur and saying, “If Trump doesn’t get elected in 2024, we are coming to kill you, so tread lightly, b----,” according to charging papers. |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Mar 29, 2024 20:47:47 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 29, 2024 20:49:27 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 29, 2024 20:52:29 GMT
This is what could happen if Trump continues to attack judges attacks on judgesSenior Judge Reggie Walton: “We do these jobs because we’re committed to the rule of law & we believe in the rule of law & the rule of law can only function effectively when we have judges who are prepared to carry out their duties without the threat of potential physical harm.”
dismantling our system of justice and the Rule of LawThe Nation is witnessing the determined delegitimization of both its Federal and State judiciaries and the systematic dismantling of its system of justice and Rule of Law by a single man – the former President of the United States.
In the months ahead, the former president can only be expected to ramp up his unprecedented efforts to delegitimize the courts of the United States, the nation’s state courts, and America’s system of justice, through his vicious, disgraceful, and unforgiveable attacks and threats on the Federal and State Judiciaries and the individual Judges of these courts.
Never in American history has any person, let alone a President of the United States, leveled such threatening attacks against the federal and state courts and federal and state judicial officers of the kind the former president has leveled continually now for years.
But suffice it to say, never in history has any person leveled such attacks and been met with such passivity, acquiescence, and submissiveness by the nation.
It is a regrettable commentary on our times that a lone federal judge, The Honorable Judge Reggie B. Walton -- because no one whose responsibility it is to do so has had the courage and the will -- would finally be left no choice but, himself, to express on national television the profound concerns of the entire Federal and State Judiciaries over Donald Trump’s contemptible attacks on the federal and state courts, the judges of these courts and their families, and the other participants in the judicial process.
It is the responsibility of the Supreme Court of the United States in the first instance to protect the federal courts, the federal judges, and all participants in the justice system from the reprehensible spectacle of the former president's inexcusable, threatening attacks, just as it is the responsibility of the respective State Supreme Courts in the first instance to protect their courts and their state judges from the same.
Ultimately, however, it is the responsibility of the entire nation to protect its courts and judges, its Constitution, its Rule of Law, and America's Democracy from vicious attack, threat, undermine, and deliberate delegitimization at the hands of anyone so determined.newrepublic.com/post/180282/conservative-judges-sound-alarm-trump-will-shred-justice-systemConservative Judges Sound Alarm: Trump Will Shred Our Justice System Prominent conservative judges are warning that Trump is posing a threat that’s like “nothing in American history.” Donald Trump’s attacks on the judges and court staff overseeing his criminal trials have much deeper legal implications than petty fines. Instead, the attacks—and the responding “passivity, acquiescence, and submissiveness by the nation”—are actively undermining the nation’s entire judicial system, prominent conservative judges are warning. In a CNN interview Thursday evening, Republican-appointed federal District Judge Reggie B. Walton felt compelled to announce that Trump’s continued attacks could result in “tyranny.” Just hours later, former Appeals Court Judge J. Michael Luttig, also a conservative judge, issued his own warning cry, declaring that Trump is responsible for the “dismantling” of the nation’s “system of justice.” “The Nation is witnessing the determined delegitimization of both its Federal and State judiciaries and the systematic dismantling of its system of justice and Rule of Law by a single man – the former President of the United States,” started Luttig in a multi-part thread on X. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 29, 2024 21:26:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 29, 2024 21:32:29 GMT
If Trump is elected, 2024 will be our last election. It's not even a secret, they're saying the quiet part out loud. calls to abolish 22nd amendmentPartner of Trump’s Project 2025 calls for abolishing the 22nd Amendment, allowing Trump to be in office forever |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Mar 29, 2024 21:32:42 GMT
More light sentencing for white child sex abusers. This one was a cop. Make of that what you will.  |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 29, 2024 21:37:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 29, 2024 21:42:58 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Mar 29, 2024 23:08:20 GMT
Councilwoman Vickie Paladino @vickiefornyc Another officer murdered on the job for nothing more than a traffic stop. Another murderer with a long rap sheet and multiple releases. Let’s be crystal clear: Every Democrat who voted for or supports criminal justice reform has P.O. Jonathan Diller’s blood on their hands. P.O. Diller doesn’t get a second chance. He doesn’t get leniency. There isn’t a DA that can cut him loose, or a nonprofit to advocate for him, or a judge to reduce his sentence. He won’t get any of that because he’s dead, thanks to an animal who DID get the benefit of all those things, repeatedly. And those who made it possible for P.O. Diller to be murdered tonight simply don’t care. That’s a fact. Sure some of them might post some boilerplate condolences, but they don’t actually care. Not really. Because if they did they’d take immediate action to change the policies which enabled this horror, and dozens just like it. But they won’t. In a day or so they’ll go right back to smirking about ‘fearmongering’ and ‘systemic racism’ as they proceed to cheerfully dismantle the NYPD, empty our jails, excuse career criminals, erase the gang database, and lower parole standards to release as many violent felons from prison as possible. The wages of progressivism cannot be ignored any longer. As we grieve another brave officer who will never hold his child again, let us hold accountable those who enabled his murderer to walk freely. Enough. Twitter If you think Trump gives a crap about the officer in this case, I’ve got a bridge to sell you. Trump showed up. Biden didn’t even give enough of a crap to even speak to the family, much less show up for them. Your understanding is wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Mar 29, 2024 23:13:28 GMT
Councilwoman Vickie Paladino @vickiefornyc Another officer murdered on the job for nothing more than a traffic stop. Another murderer with a long rap sheet and multiple releases. Let’s be crystal clear: Every Democrat who voted for or supports criminal justice reform has P.O. Jonathan Diller’s blood on their hands. P.O. Diller doesn’t get a second chance. He doesn’t get leniency. There isn’t a DA that can cut him loose, or a nonprofit to advocate for him, or a judge to reduce his sentence. He won’t get any of that because he’s dead, thanks to an animal who DID get the benefit of all those things, repeatedly. And those who made it possible for P.O. Diller to be murdered tonight simply don’t care. That’s a fact. Sure some of them might post some boilerplate condolences, but they don’t actually care. Not really. Because if they did they’d take immediate action to change the policies which enabled this horror, and dozens just like it. But they won’t. In a day or so they’ll go right back to smirking about ‘fearmongering’ and ‘systemic racism’ as they proceed to cheerfully dismantle the NYPD, empty our jails, excuse career criminals, erase the gang database, and lower parole standards to release as many violent felons from prison as possible. The wages of progressivism cannot be ignored any longer. As we grieve another brave officer who will never hold his child again, let us hold accountable those who enabled his murderer to walk freely. Enough. TwitterDo you not understand the hypocrisy of trump showing up to the funeral of this officer and uttering those words that he does not mean? Because if he meant the words he said today he would have condemned the actions of the January 6 rioters which he has never done. Indeed he is promising to pardon them. He absolutely did condemn the actions. I even provided a video of him condemning their actions.  |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Mar 29, 2024 23:15:25 GMT
If you think Trump gives a crap about the officer in this case, I’ve got a bridge to sell you. Trump showed up. Biden didn’t even give enough of a crap to even speak to the family, much less show up for them. Your understanding is wrong. I don’t think so. GOP candidates fight against increased background checks, red flag laws, and other common sense measures. rollcall.com/2023/11/01/republican-spending-bill-would-block-gun-background-check-rule/And Trump showed up for the opportunity to make it about himself. Nothing more. Stop fooling yourself. |
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Mar 29, 2024 23:18:51 GMT
Biden's tomorrow vs. Trump's tomorrow: Trump will be attending the wake of a slain NY police officer. Biden will be partying with celebrities. Twitter Let me translate that into English for you. Trump will demand to be treated like a celebrity at the wake for the slain police officer. Has he even asked the family’s permission or just publicly announced he’ll be there? Plenty of police families would refuse to have him present. Mine certainly would. He was invited. Let me translate that into English for you. They WANTED him there. Trump spoke for exactly 2 minutes. Outside, just before leaving. |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Mar 29, 2024 23:25:14 GMT
Let me translate that into English for you. Trump will demand to be treated like a celebrity at the wake for the slain police officer. Has he even asked the family’s permission or just publicly announced he’ll be there? Plenty of police families would refuse to have him present. Mine certainly would. He was invited. Let me translate that into English for you. They WANTED him there. Trump spoke for exactly 2 minutes. Outside, just before leaving. And when did he ever have anything to say about the literals dozens of American school children killed during his administration, due in part to the lax gun laws that he and other Republicans support? Where was his respect for police when his supporters were beating and tasing them at his direction outside the capitol? Your support for him is pathological. Get help. |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Mar 29, 2024 23:26:30 GMT
Do you not understand the hypocrisy of trump showing up to the funeral of this officer and uttering those words that he does not mean? Because if he meant the words he said today he would have condemned the actions of the January 6 rioters which he has never done. Indeed he is promising to pardon them. He absolutely did condemn the actions. I even provided a video of him condemning their actions. After his advisors forced him to do so. His initial response was to sit back and watch them with glee. And now he consistently refers to them as political prisoners who should be pardoned. |
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Mar 29, 2024 23:26:51 GMT
Hillary and those who accept their election loss dont get their own people arrested while fabricating Russia Collusion Hoaxes. |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Mar 29, 2024 23:27:53 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Mar 29, 2024 23:30:45 GMT
Today was just the first day of visitation for the fallen officer. There are more hours tomorrow. Also, while security was needed before the Radio City Music Hall event, the event itself did not start until 8 pm, hours after the visitation today. And the Radio City Music Hall event was likely planned months ago. That really seems like a stretch to try to blame President Biden for fellow officers not being able to attend. This isn't directed at anyone specifically, but a lot of the grumbling about the event from conservatives sounds like jealousy. President Biden is bringing in tons of money in donations, he's supported by fellow Democrats who are good surrogates for him and will be campaigning for him. In comparison, Trump is isolated and his campaign is hemorrhaging money. They're spending money on his mounting legal bills faster than they can bring it in. Trump hawking $60 bibles will only get them so far. Only 4 out of 44 of Trump's former advisors supported and endorsed him. No one is jealous of biden. Trump just made Billion S this week. He'll be okay. Not to mention, the "Broke Don" nickname from the Left is desperate, incorrect, and frankly sounds like ACTUAL jealousy. Not to mention it's projecting their intention to take away all of his money. Their words and actions just SCREAM jealousy. |
|
