Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 94

Thread: US prosecutors Portland dropping almost all charges on rioters

  1. #46 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    34,576
    Thanks
    5,715
    Thanked 15,145 Times in 10,539 Posts
    Groans
    100
    Groaned 2,987 Times in 2,752 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    What's it to you, stupid hick.

  2. #47 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    10,829
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 4,989 Times in 3,362 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 637 Times in 605 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    Hey, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy in this. It's another case of the "Hillary defense." Rioters in Portland walk from the same charges leveled against rioters at the Capitol--and who often did worse than the Capitol rioters--but the federal persecutors are going full tilt to convict the later, now obviously in good part because of their politics not their crimes.
    When precisely did the US Capitol move to Portland before it moved back to DC?
    Which person protected by the Secret Service was in a building in Portland that the rioters entered?

    Somehow I don't think you are even vaguely aware of the charges against the insurrectionists on Jan 6.
    "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

    "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do."

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Poor Richard Saunders For This Post:

    Phantasmal (05-07-2021)

  4. #48 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    73,403
    Thanks
    101,944
    Thanked 54,779 Times in 33,638 Posts
    Groans
    3,155
    Groaned 5,065 Times in 4,683 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Son of the Revolution View Post
    funny, when antifa and blm burn and loot all summer it is called a protest...
    Nope, wrong, again, there were riots and there were peaceful protests, seems you’re the one who needs to learn the difference. BLM didn’t riot.

  5. #49 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,079
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 18,937 Times in 13,200 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 832 Times in 791 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    When precisely did the US Capitol move to Portland before it moved back to DC?
    Which person protected by the Secret Service was in a building in Portland that the rioters entered?

    Somehow I don't think you are even vaguely aware of the charges against the insurrectionists on Jan 6.
    The Capitol is a federal building. The federal courthouse in Portland is a federal building. Nobody in the Capitol on the day of the riot was protected by the Secret Service. Somehow I don't think you are even vaguely aware of what happened.

    As for me, I know what they were charged with, and not one has been charged with insurrection, sedition, or treason so they obviously aren't "insurrectionists" as you claim.

    https://www.insider.com/all-the-us-c...s-names-2021-1
    https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to T. A. Gardner For This Post:

    Sailor (05-07-2021)

  7. #50 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    10,829
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 4,989 Times in 3,362 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 637 Times in 605 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    The Capitol is a federal building. The federal courthouse in Portland is a federal building. Nobody in the Capitol on the day of the riot was protected by the Secret Service. Somehow I don't think you are even vaguely aware of what happened.

    As for me, I know what they were charged with, and not one has been charged with insurrection, sedition, or treason so they obviously aren't "insurrectionists" as you claim.

    https://www.insider.com/all-the-us-c...s-names-2021-1
    https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases
    It seems you still don't understand the charges.
    I suggest you look at some of them and then actually research the law they are charged with breaking.
    https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases


    40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2) - Violent Entry and Disorderly Conduct on Capitol Grounds,
    A Federal Courthouse is not the Capitol. Never has been and never will be.

    Are you sure no one at the Capitol that day was protected by the Secret Service? Who was the crowd threatening to hang? If you search you will even find video of the person protected by the Secret Service being moved along with the "football". Who did Trump attack for not overturning the election for him when they accepted the votes by the electoral college as required?

    Somehow, I don't think I am the one that is not even vaguely aware of what happened.
    "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

    "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do."

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Poor Richard Saunders For This Post:

    Phantasmal (05-07-2021)

  9. #51 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    40,213
    Thanks
    14,475
    Thanked 23,679 Times in 16,485 Posts
    Groans
    23
    Groaned 585 Times in 561 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    The Capitol is a federal building. The federal courthouse in Portland is a federal building. Nobody in the Capitol on the day of the riot was protected by the Secret Service. Somehow I don't think you are even vaguely aware of what happened.

    As for me, I know what they were charged with, and not one has been charged with insurrection, sedition, or treason so they obviously aren't "insurrectionists" as you claim.

    https://www.insider.com/all-the-us-c...s-names-2021-1
    https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases
    Why bother explaining the obvious to the obvious dumb fuck?

  10. #52 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    73,403
    Thanks
    101,944
    Thanked 54,779 Times in 33,638 Posts
    Groans
    3,155
    Groaned 5,065 Times in 4,683 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dutch Uncle View Post
    Agreed it would be a good strategy. OTOH, it appears the cases being dropped for budgetary reasons. If I were a state or Federal employee attacked by these assholes, I'd be pissed.

    Let's hope money if found to prosecute the criminals.
    The assault on officers are being prosecuted. Who were you referring to?

  11. #53 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    136,629
    Thanks
    46,762
    Thanked 68,643 Times in 51,927 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,506 Times in 2,463 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phantasmal View Post
    The assault on officers are being prosecuted. Who were you referring to?
    Portland: https://www.wsj.com/articles/almost-...ed-11618501979
    Of 96 cases the U.S. attorney’s office in Portland filed last year charging protesters with federal crimes, including assaulting federal officers, civil disorder, and failing to obey, prosecutors have dropped 47 of them, government documents show. Ten people have pleaded guilty to related charges and two were ordered detained pending trial. None have gone to trial.

    As the WSJ article notes, the cases were resolved for different reasons. Mostly community service in plea deals. Some charges were dropped due to lack of merit.

    Example: "The government reviewed some cases and agreed no crime was committed or found other reasons to drop the charges, Ms. Hay, the public defender, said. “Many of these cases originated in chaos and darkness, after officers charged out of the federal courthouse at night and arrested people who had not dispersed,” she said.

    Prosecutors last week, for example, moved to dismiss “in the interest of justice” a charge of assaulting a federal officer they filed last July against a Texas man, David Bouchard, who showed up at a nighttime protest with a leaf blower to disperse police tear gas and ended up on the ground with two police officers, according to an affidavit.

    “We reviewed video that showed he didn’t try to hurt any U.S. officer,” Mr. Bouchard’s attorney, Ernest Warren, said. “I think the U.S. attorney’s office in Oregon was very reasonable, and they looked at the circumstances of his case.
    God bless America and those who defend our Constitution.

    "Hatred is a failure of imagination" - Graham Greene, "The Power and the Glory"

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Doc Dutch For This Post:

    Phantasmal (05-07-2021)

  13. #54 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello T. A. Gardner,

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    In a switch of administrations, the US Attorney's office in Portland is dropping most of their cases against rioters there including at least sixteen (16) cases of felony assault on a federal officer--many of these on video as well.


    https://www.thewashingtontime.com/mo...orney-reveals/

    It would seem only those who were caught with the most absolute of proof are even being pushed for plea deals, the rest are simply being let go.

    My suspicion is that this wholesale dropping of charges many of which are far worse, with equal or better evidence to that of the Capitol riot will be used in defense of Capitol rioters who will now argue that their prosecution is political, not criminal, in nature.
    Your link explains why:

    “I think the federal government went overboard in some of the ways they addressed these protests,” said Hay, “And what we’re seeing now is many of the cases that were brought because of the federal government’s overreach are now being dismissed.”

    " Kevin Sonoff, public affairs officer for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Oregon, issued a statement which reads in part, “Dismissals are very case-specific and based on our assessment of available evidence. If we do not believe we can prove a charge beyond a reasonable doubt, we will dismiss the case.” "
    Last edited by PoliTalker; 05-07-2021 at 07:48 PM.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to PoliTalker For This Post:

    Phantasmal (05-07-2021)

  15. #55 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,079
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 18,937 Times in 13,200 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 832 Times in 791 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    It seems you still don't understand the charges.
    I suggest you look at some of them and then actually research the law they are charged with breaking.
    https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases


    40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2) - Violent Entry and Disorderly Conduct on Capitol Grounds,
    A Federal Courthouse is not the Capitol. Never has been and never will be.
    Red herring fallacy. In the case of the Portland federal courthouse, the protesters never gained entry so they couldn't be charged with trespass could they?

    https://www.justice.gov/usao-or/pr/7...demonstrations

    However, there are charges on that list that are very serious felonies like arson and assault with a deadly weapon.

    Are you sure no one at the Capitol that day was protected by the Secret Service? Who was the crowd threatening to hang? If you search you will even find video of the person protected by the Secret Service being moved along with the "football". Who did Trump attack for not overturning the election for him when they accepted the votes by the electoral college as required?
    Then present that source. I shouldn't have to do your homework. As for the last sentence, it is nothing more than a complex question fallacy in the form of an ipse dixit (he said it himself) fallacy. Ipse dixitism is a form of political argument meant to provide an internal right - wrong conclusion from the statement itself.

    Somehow, I don't think I am the one that is not even vaguely aware of what happened.
    Somehow you are wrong. And, don't think. You don't do it very well as it is.

  16. #56 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,079
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 18,937 Times in 13,200 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 832 Times in 791 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello T. A. Gardner,



    Your link explains why:

    “I think the federal government went overboard in some of the ways they addressed these protests,” said Hay, “And what we’re seeing now is many of the cases that were brought because of the federal government’s overreach are now being dismissed.” \

    " Kevin Sonoff, public affairs officer for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Oregon, issued a statement which reads in part, “Dismissals are very case-specific and based on our assessment of available evidence. If we do not believe we can prove a charge beyond a reasonable doubt, we will dismiss the case.” "
    I apply the same exact standard to the Capitol riot...

  17. #57 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,079
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 18,937 Times in 13,200 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 832 Times in 791 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sailor View Post
    Why bother explaining the obvious to the obvious dumb fuck?
    Because the best defense against Left stupidity and vapid, shallow rhetoric (it isn't thinking) is exposure to the light of reason and facts.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to T. A. Gardner For This Post:

    Sailor (05-08-2021)

  19. #58 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    4,107
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 632 Times in 521 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 69 Times in 67 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phantasmal View Post
    Nope, wrong, again, there were riots and there were peaceful protests, seems you’re the one who needs to learn the difference. BLM didn’t riot.
    you are a liar saying blm didn't riot...

  20. #59 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello T. A. Gardner,

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    I apply the same exact standard to the Capitol riot...
    I have not heard of any of the insurrectionists having their cases dismissed. I don't think they are being brought in unless investigators believe there is a provable case.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  21. #60 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,079
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 18,937 Times in 13,200 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 832 Times in 791 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello T. A. Gardner,

    I have not heard of any of the insurrectionists having their cases dismissed. I don't think they are being brought in unless investigators believe there is a provable case.
    The only reason the ones in Portland were is because the (somebody's in charge) administration is rife with radical Leftists who don't want to punish their own...

Similar Threads

  1. Trump's prosecutors not taking action against DC rioters
    By FUCK THE POLICE in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-01-2020, 08:18 PM
  2. Rioters burn government building during riot in Portland
    By Earl in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 137
    Last Post: 08-20-2020, 01:48 PM
  3. Portland rioters are pigs
    By Hawkeye10 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 08-04-2020, 01:36 AM
  4. Portland rioters should just give up already
    By canceled.2021.3 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-26-2020, 06:38 AM
  5. Portland Mayor Scorned by Rioters / Tear Gassed
    By anatta in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-23-2020, 07:20 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •