Re: Witches selected in U.S. Capitol riot trial of Oath Keepers militia

[Mary E. Junck Chairman]

In article <snuemc$r17$1...@news.dns-netz.com>
Lawless democrats <une...@law.usa> wrote:
>
> On 02 Oct 2022, Rudy Canoza <r...@cap.con> posted some
> news:POh_K.112014$tRy7....@fx36.iad:
>
> > On 10/2/2022 6:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> >> On 10/2/22 07:42, Siri Cruise wrote:
> >>> In article <tIicnajLn_4ywKT-...@giganews.com>,
> >>>   David Hartung <da...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> attempt to overthrow the US government by using a mob to invade the
> >>>> capital building is idiotic to the point of being unbelievable.
> >>>
> >>> Too late. Judges have already recognised it as 14th Amendment
> >>> Section 3 insurrection and keeping participants out of elected
> >>> office.
> >>
> >> Example please?
> >
> > You are such a stupid fucking shitbag.
> >
> > "Judge calls Jan. 6 an ‘insurrection,’ bars ‘Cowboys for
> > Trump’ founder from office"
> > https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/06/judge-calls-jan-6-an-insurrection-bars-
> > cowboys-for-trump-founder-from-office.html
> >
> > *You have already commented on this*, *you stupid fucking asshole*
>
> Obviously you thought you could improve on your personal definition of
> stupidity by demonstrating yours.
>
> <https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-
> content/uploads/2022/09/D101CV202200473-griffin.pdf>
>
> Let's cite the specific language entered into record by the Judge from a
> notably left wing blue-voting parasitic state.
>
> "The government of the United States has enacted laws designed, first, to
> protect itself and its authority as a government, and, secondly, its
> control over those agencies to which, under the constitution and laws, it
> extends govermental regulation. For the former purpose, --namely, to
> protect itself and its authority as a government,--it has enacted that
> every person who incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in, any
> rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or
> the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, 'and any two or more
> persons in any state or territory who conspire to overthrow, put down, or
> destroy by force the government of the United States, or to levy wara
> against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof; or by force to
> prevent, hinder or delay the execution of any law of the United States
> contrary to the authority thereof, 'shall be visited with certain
> penalties there named.
>
> Insurrection is a rising against civil or political authority,--the open
> and active opposition of a number of persons to the execution of law in a
> city or state. Now, the laws of the United States forbid, under penalty,
> any person from obstruction or retarding the passage of the mail, and make
> it the official duty of the officers to arrest such offenders, and bring
> them before the court. If, therefore, it shall appear to you that any
> person or persons have willfully obstructed or retarded the mails, and
> that their attemnpted arrest for such offense has ben opposed by such a
> number of persons as would constitute a general uprising in that
> particular locality, then the fact of an insurrection, within the meaning
> of the law, has been established; and he who by speech, writing, or other
> inducement assists in setting it on foot, or carrying it along, or gives
> it aid or comfort, is guilty of a violation of law. It is not necessary
> that there be bloodshed; it is not necessary that its dimensions should be
> so portentous as to insure probable success, to constitute an
> insurrection. It is necessary, however, that the rising should be in
> opposition to the execution of the laws of the United States, and should
> be so formidable as for the time being to defy the authority of the United
> States."
>
>
> Now let's provide the cite this lazy purveyor of the law used to form and
> write his half-assed instructions and opinion.
>
>
>
> https://cite.case.law/f/62/828/
>
> Insurrection is a rising against civil or political authority, — the open
> and active opposition of a number of persons to the execution of law in a
> city or state. Now, the laws of the United States forbid, under penalty,
> any person from obstructing or retarding the passage of the mail, and make
> it the duty of the officers to arrest such offenders, and bring them
> before the court. If, therefore, it shall appear to you that any person or
> persons have willfully obstructed or retarded the mails, and that their
> attempted arrest for such offense has been opposed by such a number of
> persons as would constitute a general uprising in that particular
> locality, and as threatens for the time being the civil and political
> authority, then the fact of an insurrection, within the meaning of the
> law, has been established; and he who by speech, writing, or other
> inducement assists in setting it on foot, or carrying it along, or gives
> it aid or comfort, is guilty of a violation of laAv. It is not necessary
> that there should be bloodshed; it is not necessary that its dimensions
> should be so portentous as to insure probable success, to constitute an
> insurrection. It is necessary, however, that the rising should be in
> opposition to the execution of the laws of the United States, and should
> be so formidable as for the time being to defy the authority of the United
> States. When men gather to resist the cml or political power of the United
> States, or to oppose the execution of its laws, and are in such force that
> the civil authorities are inadequate to put them down, and a considerable
> military force is needed to accomplish that result, they become
> insurgents; and every person who knowingly incites, aids, or abets them,
> no matter what his motUes may be, is likewise an insurgent. The penalty
> for the offense is seA-ere, and, as I have said, is designed to protect
> the government and its authority against direct attack. There are other
> provisions of law designed to protect those particular agencies which come
> within governmental control. To these I will now call your attention.
>
> The mails are in the special keeping of the government and laws of the
> United States. To insure their unhindered transmission, it is made an
> offense to knowingly and willfully obstruct or retard the passage of the
> mail, or any carriage, horse, driver, or carrier carrying the same. It is
> also proA’ided that “if two or more persons conspire together to commit
> any offense against the United States and one or more of such parties do
> any act to effect the object of the conspiracy,” all the parties thereto
> shall be subject to a penalty. Any person knowingly and willfully doing
> any act which contributes, or is calculated to contribute, to obstructing
> or hindering the mails, or who knowingly and willfully takes a part in
> such *831acts, no matter how trivial, if intentional, is guilty of
> violating the first of these provisions; and any person who conspires with
> one or more persons, one of whom subsequently commits the offense, is
> likewise guilty of an offense against the United States. What constitutes
> conspiracy to hinder or obstruct the mails will be touched upon in
> connection with the subject to which 1 now call your attention.
>
> The constitution places the regulation of commerce between the several
> states, and between the states and foreign nations, within the keeping of
> the United States government. Anything which is designed to be transported
> for commercial purposes from one state to another, and is actually in
> transit, and any passenger who’ is actually engaged in any such interstate
> commercial transaction, and any car or carriage actually transporting or
> engaged in transporting such passenger or thing, are the agencies and
> subject-matter of interstate commerce, and any conspiracy in restraint of
> such trade or commerce is an offense against the United States. To
> restrain is to prohibit, limit, confine, or abridge a thing. The restraint
> may be permanent or temporary. It may be intended to prohibit, limit, or
> abridge for all time, or for a day only. The law draws no distinction in
> this respect. Commerce of this character is intended to be free, except
> subject to regulation by law, at all times, and for all periods. Temporary
> restraint is therefore as intolerable as permanent, and practical
> restraint by actual physical interference, as criminal as that which flows
> from the arrangements of business and organization. Any physical
> interference, therefore, which has the effect of restraining any
> passenger, car, or thing constituting an element of interstate commerce,
> forms the foundation for this offense. But to complete this offense, as
> also that of conspiracy to obstruct the mails, there must exist, in
> addition to the overt act and purpose, the element of criminal conspiracy.
>
>
> In Portland Oregon, businesses were burned and damaged in protest again
> the federal government.
>
> In Portland Oregon, federal buildings were attacked and damaged.
>
> <https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/07/21/portland-riots-read-out-july-21>
>
> In Seattle washington, federal buildings were attacked and damaged.
>
> <https://interdependentcourts.com/2021/01/24/another-federal-courthouse-
> attacked-by-a-mob/>
>
> Are those attacks not the very definition of the cite and judge?

Yes they are.

Why weren't Antifa insurrectionists charged with insurrection?

[Suzanna M. Frank Vice President – Research & Metrics]

In article <srktkk$70c8$1...@news.freedyn.de>
Siri Cruise <chine...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> In article <FLecnfIDXY5eEKT-...@giganews.com>,

> David Hartung <da...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 10/2/22 07:42, Siri Cruise wrote:
> > > In article <tIicnajLn_4ywKT-...@giganews.com>,
> > > David Hartung <da...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> attempt to overthrow the US government by using a mob to invade the
> > >> capital building is idiotic to the point of being unbelievable.
> > >
> > > Too late. Judges have already recognised it as 14th Amendment
> > > Section 3 insurrection and keeping participants out of elected
> > > office.
> >
> > Example please?
>

> https://alaskapublic.org/2022/09/23/alaska-rep-eastman-remains-on-
> ballot-but-could-be-disqualified-after-election/

Charges would have to be preferred.

You know, like they were in Portland, Seattle and Baltimore when
antifa attacked and damaged federal buildings.