Here's a list that a lawyer who went thru the Senate report came up with for possible crimes committed by the Trump administration in connection with the attempt to change the results of the election.

Coercion of political activity, 18 US Code, Section 610, makes it a crime for anyone to intimidate or coerce, or attempt to intimidate or coerce, any federal employee to engage in any political activity, including refusing to work or working on behalf of any candidate. In the activities at issue, Trump was simply a candidate; he was not the president of the United States with respect to these activities. Anyone who violates that section is eligible for a fine and/or up to three years in prison. That is one offense that this report screams quite loudly, pointing to the conclusion that he and a number of others were guilty of twisting arms in order to pressure people into engaging in political activity. The Hatch Act itself, which is about engaging in political activity while being a government official, does not apply to the president, but Section 610 definitely does.

The second major offense this report strongly indicates has been committed by various people, probably including the president, is seditious conspiracy, 18 US Code, Section 2384, which says that if two or more people conspire to overthrow the government, or to oppose its authority by force, or to seize or take the United States property by force, they’re guilty of seditious conspiracy, which can lead to imprisonment of up to 20 years. Now there are ambiguities — what kind of threat constitutes force? Certainly, the sacking of the Capitol involved force, but that is only the tail end of the conspiracy exposed here. The dots are not going to be very difficult to connect, assuming our Justice Department is interested in trying to connect them. That is a big assumption, given that we simply don’t know where the attorney general of the United States is going with any of the evidence that is emerging.

The third offense, which is less directly connected with this report, but is indirectly connected, is rebellion or insurrection. That’s 18 US Code Section 2383. That section provides that whoever incites, assists, or engages in any insurrection against the authority of the United States or its laws, or gives aid or comfort thereto — that’s really important — is to be fined and subject to imprisonment of up to 10 years and shall be incapable of holding any office in the United States. That would apply to any number of people in this report who were likely giving aid and comfort to the insurrection.

Another list of Pete's possibilities.

Jim the we isn’t the new Republican Party

Clinton got a BJ and the right flips out .. Trump try’s to over turn the election and they get closer?

So we should use the new Republican version on attempting a crime

And say I didn’t rape her I tried got all her clothes of but I couldn’t get an erection . So you can’t say I raped her . Her name is America
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim the we isn’t the new Republican Party

Clinton got a BJ and the right flips out .. Trump try’s to over turn the election and they get closer?

So we should use the new Republican version on attempting a crime

And say I didn’t rape her I tried got all her clothes of but I couldn’t get an erection . So you can’t say I raped her . Her name is America


Ps Republican do want an autocrat running the country their to dumb they just call Trump a patriot . Thinking that’s what an autocrat is ..

That’s why Republicans love Putin

Why are Republicans using Putin’s talking points? This study helps explain.
Increasingly, Republican voters think Vladimir Putin is a good leader. But Russians don’t feel the same way about President Trump.

You really need to expand you reading list
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I searched transcripts for Fox today and see no coverage of the subpoena battle playing out between Trump-world figures and the January 6 committee. The only time I saw the word “subpoena” mentioned was when a reporter asked about it in WH press briefing. Fox then cut away.
Fox world is oblivious
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sure Jan
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thank you for the opportunity.

the fire extinguisher story was not true...are you still pushing misinformation months after the fact?

APRIL 20, 2021
*A full autopsy found that officer Brian Sicknick suffered two strokes after the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol, with no sign that any injury or reaction to chemical irritants played a role.

New information from the chief medical examiner for the District of Columbia provides fresh details that call into question early reports about how U.S. Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick died.

Sicknick died the day after the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol. Initial reports, citing law enforcement sources, said that the 42-year-old had been struck on the head with a fire extinguisher. Follow-up coverage challenged that, saying he had been sprayed with a form of mace, and that the cause of death remained unclear.

On April 19, the medical examiner, Dr. Francisco J. Diaz, determined that Sicknick died from two strokes at the base of his brain caused by a blood clot in the artery that feeds that part of the body.

Diaz told the Washington Post that there were no signs of any injury, or evidence that Sicknick had an allergic reaction to chemical irritants. Sicknick died, Diaz said, of natural causes.


https://www.politifact.com/article/2...k-died-natura/

are you kidding me? do you know how completely and thoroughly that lector lie has been debunked?

He died of natural causes, he had two strokes the next day. Natural causes.

Are you still saying the Duke lacrosse team was guilty, and that Nick Sandman is a white supremacist?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim you do know if you robbed a bank and someone died of a heart attack . You and even your getaway driver gets charged with that persons death..

The police or the law doesn’t dismiss the incident that lead to the heart attack .. not sure how the medical examiner didn’t take into account what happened to him and how those thing contributed to his death causes .. I guess your suggestion is they had no impact in his death ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He collapsed on Jan 6th and died the next day. The conclusion that the bear spray or fire extinguisher didn’t alone directly cause the death is mostly for legal reasons if homicide charges were sought.

Blood clots have a nasty habit of causing that. Seems they don't need any help.

you said he was beaten with a fire extinguisher, which was the original
liberal spin. the autopsy showed zero signs of any injuries. . sorry to disappoint you.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The right can spin this as a peaceful protest, but that only works if you never saw the news, never watched any of the footage as it came out later and if you did and still believe it your memory is extremely short, very selective or you need to spin the party line. Trump not getting protected with executive privilege has to be making him crazy and nervous, but he will do what he does best whine and then lawyer up.

"MOSTLY peaceful." If you remember, that was the mantra for the various destructive riots that the left covered for over the past couple of years. The vast, vast majority of the 30 thousand or so Trump demonstrators were very peaceful.

they didnt murder anybody. saying they did is like saying trump won, based on zero evidence
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The vast, vast majority of the 30 thousand or so Trump demonstrators were very peaceful

The vast majority of BLM protesters were very peaceful but I don’t see you supporting them with that argument ..

I am 100 positive you support what happened Jan 6th and you also support Trumps attempts to overturn the election…. You are like most right wingers you want your outcome by any means necessary . All while claiming to be a great lover of the constitution…. All the while looking the other way while Trump and Republicans try to trample all over it .. calling themselves Patriots
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Did I say they murdered anyone Jim? No I didn’t, however contributing to several deaths and causing ptsd for any of those officers on the receiving end of beatings with anything they brought or could get there hands on, while attempting to break into the capital building to stop the certification of the election is and should be seen for what it was. The right saw it for what is was for about one day and then suddenly their stories morphed into something else.

no you didn’t say that. but spence and pete said it. that was the point. obviously a very small
number of them were violent, mostly causing property damage. unlike the blm rioters ( who got a complete free pass from the left) they didn’t murder anyone, they didn’t burn any buildings to the ground.

interesting your side cares about the well being of cops, only when right wing lunatics are hurting them?

violence against police is
skyrocketing, how many cases of violence against cops did you decry here? just this one instance?


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I have not said anything to warrant your accusation. If you are concerned about "looking the other way" you might want to peer into your own looking glass.

And I know of no greater way of trampling all over the Constitution than interpreting it in a way that will achieve desired outcomes. From what you've said, you seem to think that it is perfectly fine for SCOTUS Justices to interpret the Constitution for the supposed greater good (because times have changed). Such pragmatic interpretation nullifies the Constitution to a mere gathering of words that can mean what a judge needs them to mean in order to allow government to do what its current clan of politicians consider best for us all--which is to say that the Constitution is just a bunch of words judges can manipulate in order to grant government the power to do as it wishes so long as it is for the good as seen by politicians and judges. That is to say that the Constitution does not actually limit government, does not actually guaranty any unalienable rights.

That method of interpretation is one of the "means", as you put it, of getting "your outcome by any means necessary".

Really a SMALL number were violent, what no TV in your house?

small numbers of both were violent, right?

how come the left won’t say that a really small number of cops commit police brutality?

funny how they only play the “really small number” card when it suits them.


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If there are only a few bad eggs or apples in the police as you would have us believe
Why can’t the “overwhelming majority” fix it ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Maybe it's like the vast overwhelming majority of Muslims are peaceful, but they just can't fix those pesky few head cutters.

i guess this is news to you but bad people don’t wear signs. so you can’t always do anything about them until after.

and that you’d say “if” there are only a few bad apples, as if that’s. it irrefutable fact, shows us how sharp you aren’t.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

exactly. or the small number of bad apples in Chicago that the well meaning folks there can’t fix. but only the cops are problematic for not being able to fix themselves.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How many cops were present at George Floyd’s execution?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

that was a crime, which we dealt with.

in 2019, according to the washington post, 9 unarmed blacks were killed by the police. let’s assume every one of those was police brutality ( probably not true, but let’s assume it).

there are over 700,000 police officers in the US. one out of 80,000 killed an unarmed black man in a whole year. now, one instance is too many, but it’s a rounding error, not an epidemic.

One out of 80,000. That’s pretty close to zero.

how many blacks are killed
by other blacks every year in chicago? Hundreds. that’s one city. but the left doesn’t care, because THAT sue doesn’t help them win elections, and that’s all this is, politics. the left doesn’t care, because liberalism contributes to urban violence, obviously.

gang violence and fatherlessness is a million times more destructive to blacks, but we ignore it, because it’s not a politically winning issue for the left.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Actually it says 13 unarmed black people were “shot” by police in 2019. Killings like George Floyd or Elijah McClain wouldn’t even be counted using their method.

i now see 9, 13, and 15.

how many cops are there?

and how many blacks are murdered by other blacks? so which is a bigger problem for blacks?

still trying to see how you can call
the capital police officers death a murder?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

lest you think that method keeps
numbers too low, it would
include a case like michael brown, who was unarmed but who was posing a lethal threat to wilson. unarmed does not necessarily mean innocent.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I never did call it a murder, but I’d be willing to wager if the attack had not happened he’d still be alive.

you said he was beaten to death with a fire extinguisher. that would t be a murder? we have to argue that now?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I said he was beaten with a fire extinguisher which was widely reported. The medical examiner said he didn’t have head injuries that would have directly caused his death. It’s really moot at this point, watch the videos of cops being crushed and beaten. I can’t believe more police didn’t die.

Keep trying to downplay the event, it speaks for itself.

It’s the spin the right needs to put on it and Jim gobbles it up from his buddies on the Fox truth network.

I’m still astounded that you work with numbers for a living. Most officers never fire their weapon in the line of duty their entire career. Many never even take it out of their holster. Look at the patterns within departments and individuals.

right, most never fire their weapons. and if those 700,000 officers were all a bunch of racist assassins, my qualitative skills tell me there would be more than 13 deaths a year.

you can’t agree with that obvious conclusion for political reasons.

which tragedy is more destructive for blacks, police misconduct or back in black violence? which does more harm, and to what degree?

you have fun with that…
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Young lady, the police play by rules outside the rule of law
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

then why is it so beyond rare for them to incorrectly hurt civilians? all those dangerous 911 calls in tense situations, and 15 unarmed blacks killed in all of 2019 in the entire nation? you call that a pandemic? or a rounding error? 700,000+ cops, millions and millions of tense/violent situations,,where is the evidence that they routinely violate the law?

tru answering the same question, tough guy? which force does more damage to blacks? white cops, or black on black crime?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Blacks?
That’s only one part of the games played by cops
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device