Re: There Is No Insurrection Case against Trump

[Jake]

In article <uoh0rd$3oq4f$1...@dont-email.me>

> I'm the queer who follows Trump's dog to pick up turds when it
shits.

If there were, the Justice Department would already have brought
charges against him.
You know insurrection is a crime, right?

Just to recap, under Section 2383 of the federal criminal code, a
person is guilty of a felony, punishable by up to ten years’
imprisonment, if he

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 why do we need a refresher on this? Because the Department of
Justice has been investigating Donald Trump and the January 6, 2021,
Capitol riot for nearly three years, yet no insurrection charges
have ever been brought against Trump ...

https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/09/there-is-no-insurrection-
case-against-trump/

[Skeeter]

In article <20240121.230...@erienetworks.net>,
rema...@domain.invalid says...

>
> In article <uoh0rd$3oq4f$1...@dont-email.me>
>
> > I'm the queer who follows Trump's dog to pick up turds when it
> shits.
>
> If there were, the Justice Department would already have brought
> charges against him.
> You know insurrection is a crime, right?

So is rape and yet.

>
> Just to recap, under Section 2383 of the federal criminal code, a

> person is guilty of a felony, punishable by up to ten years�

[Baxter]

Skeeter <Skeet...@proton.me> wrote in
news:MPG.401833245...@usnews.blocknews.net:

===============

Why Jan. 6 insurrections sent a letter to the Folger Shakespeare Library

While insurrectionists were plotting to storm the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6,
2021, they took time to write and send a letter to an institution two
blocks from their target: the Folger Shakespeare Library, the world’s
largest collection of material related to the English playwright.

“We will be blocking access to your building … to prevent our persons of
grievance from using you as a loophole,” read the insurrectionists’
letter, which circulated on a pro-Trump message board called TheDonald
before the insurrection and was published this month in the Folger’s
online archive.

The letter explained that the insurrectionists would create a 2.4-mile
blockade “surrounding all buildings to which the U.S. Capitol has
underground tunnels to” — including the John Adams Building of the
Library of Congress, with which the Folger shares a block — presumably to
prevent those inside the Capitol from escaping through the buildings.

“This is nothing personal to the library itself,” the letter continued.
“We have no intention of damaging, trespassing, or otherwise altering
your facility in any way...We sincerely apologize in advance to any
inconvenience this may cause you … we are simply citizens practicing our
1st amendment rights and are only involving you by happenstance.”

Read more : [link:https://wapo.st/3SsDGRd|

At the very least this letter PROVES that 6Jan was not "spontaneous".
Well planned in fact.

[Scout]

"Baxter" <bax02_s...@baxcode.com> wrote in message
news:uom2qa$phl5$4...@dont-email.me...

> Skeeter <Skeet...@proton.me> wrote in
> news:MPG.401833245...@usnews.blocknews.net:
>
>> In article <20240121.230...@erienetworks.net>,
>> rema...@domain.invalid says...
>>>
>>> In article <uoh0rd$3oq4f$1...@dont-email.me>
>>>
>>> > I'm the queer who follows Trump's dog to pick up turds when it
>>> shits.
>>>
>>> If there were, the Justice Department would already have brought
>>> charges against him.
>>> You know insurrection is a crime, right?
>>
>> So is rape and yet.
>>>
>>> Just to recap, under Section 2383 of the federal criminal code, a

>>> person is guilty of a felony, punishable by up to ten yearsโค?

>>> imprisonment, if he
>>>
>>> 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 why do we need a refresher on this? Because the Department of
>>> Justice has been investigating Donald Trump and the January 6, 2021,
>>> Capitol riot for nearly three years, yet no insurrection charges
>>> have ever been brought against Trump ...
>>>
>>> https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/09/there-is-no-insurrection-
>>> case-against-trump/
>>
>>
>
> ===============
>
> Why Jan. 6 insurrections sent a letter to the Folger Shakespeare Library

Which of these have been convicted of insurrection?

[Wilson Woods]

On 1/22/2024 12:56 PM, scooter lied:

>
>
> "Baxter" <bax02_s...@baxcode.com> wrote in message
> news:uom2qa$phl5$4...@dont-email.me...
>> Skeeter <Skeet...@proton.me> wrote in
>> news:MPG.401833245...@usnews.blocknews.net:
>>
>>> In article <20240121.230...@erienetworks.net>,
>>> rema...@domain.invalid says...
>>>>
>>>> In article <uoh0rd$3oq4f$1...@dont-email.me>
>>>>
>>>> > I'm the queer who follows Trump's dog to pick up turds when it
>>>> shits.
>>>>
>>>> If there were, the Justice Department would already have brought
>>>> charges against him.
>>>> You know insurrection is a crime, right?
>>>
>>> So is rape and yet.
>>>>
>>>> Just to recap, under Section 2383 of the federal criminal code, a

>>>> person is guilty of a felony, punishable by up to ten years�

>>>> imprisonment, if he
>>>>
>>>> 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 why do we need a refresher on this? Because the Department of
>>>> Justice has been investigating Donald Trump and the January 6, 2021,
>>>> Capitol riot for nearly three years, yet no insurrection charges
>>>> have ever been brought against Trump ...
>>>>
>>>> https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/09/there-is-no-insurrection-
>>>> case-against-trump/
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ===============
>>
>> Why Jan. 6 insurrections sent a letter to the Folger Shakespeare Library
>
> Which of these have been convicted of insurrection?

Not necessary to judge that the event *was* an insurrection, scooter. It was.

Here's the same thing I told your fellow right-wingnut knuckle-dragging fuckwit
Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, scooter. Suppose your house is
burglarized and thousands of dollars of goods and money are stolen. The police
investigate, but they never do apprehend, *charge* and prosecute a suspect. Does
that mean the burglary never occurred, scooter? Are you so fucking stupid you're
going to claim a criminal event didn't happen until and unless a person is
prosecuted for a specific statutory crime? You are that stupid, scooter. And wrong.

The violent attack on the Capitol was an insurrection, regardless of whether or
not anyone is charged with that statutory crime. Insurrection is not just a
statutory crime, but also a description of a type of event, and the violent
assault on the Capitol of 01/06/2021 meets all the criteria of being an
insurrection. It was an insurrection, scooter.

[Skeeter]

In article <A4CrN.221414$Ama9....@fx12.iad>, ban...@hotmail.com
says...

>
> On 1/22/2024 12:56 PM, scooter lied:
>
> >
> >
> > "Baxter" <bax02_s...@baxcode.com> wrote in message
> > news:uom2qa$phl5$4...@dont-email.me...
> >> Skeeter <Skeet...@proton.me> wrote in
> >> news:MPG.401833245...@usnews.blocknews.net:
> >>
> >>> In article <20240121.230...@erienetworks.net>,
> >>> rema...@domain.invalid says...
> >>>>
> >>>> In article <uoh0rd$3oq4f$1...@dont-email.me>
> >>>>
> >>>> > I'm the queer who follows Trump's dog to pick up turds when it
> >>>> shits.
> >>>>
> >>>> If there were, the Justice Department would already have brought
> >>>> charges against him.
> >>>> You know insurrection is a crime, right?
> >>>
> >>> So is rape and yet.
> >>>>
> >>>> Just to recap, under Section 2383 of the federal criminal code, a

> >>>> person is guilty of a felony, punishable by up to ten yearsâ??

Protest gone bad. Unarmed girl murdered. No charges of insurrection. No
one but you is calling it that. Remember when you screamed the
Rittenhouse was guilty and got slapped down? Well it's happening again.

[Andrew W]

"Wilson Woods" wrote in message news:A4CrN.221414$Ama9....@fx12.iad...

Because all the loony leftists say so.

>
>Here's the same thing I told your fellow right-wingnut knuckle-dragging
>fuckwit Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, scooter.

That kind of sick vomit destroys your credibility every time. You have zero.

>
>Suppose your house is burglarized and thousands of dollars of goods and
>money are stolen. The police investigate, but they never do apprehend,
>*charge* and prosecute a suspect. Does that mean the burglary never
>occurred, scooter?

Trump is not a burglary suspect. He wasn't at the capitol.

>
>Are you so fucking stupid you're going to claim a criminal event didn't
>happen until and unless a person is prosecuted for a specific statutory
>crime? You are that stupid, scooter. And wrong.
>

You are stupid to think you can jail an ex president just because you think
he somehow "incited insurrection".

>
>The violent attack on the Capitol was an insurrection, regardless of
>whether or not anyone is charged with that statutory crime.

The Dems cheated. The crowd was angry. There was no pre-planned or organised
entering of the capitol.

>
>Insurrection is not just a statutory crime, but also a description of a
>type of event, and the violent assault on the Capitol of 01/06/2021 meets
>all the criteria of being an insurrection. It was an insurrection, scooter.
>

You are just regurgitating what the rest of the left spews, Rudy. You can't
think for yourself.
And the reason you post under many names is to make yourself look legion.
But it's not working.


--
Definition of an idiot/ignoramus: Someone who gets their information from
the mainstream media and calls it facts and evidence.

http://www.rumormillnews.com - The best alternative news site

[Wilson Woods]

On 1/22/2024 9:37 PM, Andrea W, stupid lying Nazi troll whore, lied:

No, Andrea, you Nazi troll whore.

>
>>
>> Here's the same thing I told your fellow right-wingnut knuckle-dragging
>> fuckwit Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, scooter.
>
> That kind of

No, Andrea, you Nazi troll whore.

>
>>
>> Suppose your house is burglarized and thousands of dollars of goods and money
>> are stolen. The police investigate, but they never do apprehend, *charge* and
>> prosecute a suspect. Does that mean the burglary never occurred, scooter?
>
> Trump is not a burglary suspect.

The point went right over your head, Andrea, you Nazi troll whore.

>>
>> Are you so fucking stupid you're going to claim a criminal event didn't happen
>> until and unless a person is prosecuted for a specific statutory crime? You
>> are that stupid, scooter. And wrong.
>>
>
> You are stupid to think you can jail an ex president just because you think he
> somehow "incited insurrection".

We're not talking about jail in this thread, Andrea, you Nazi troll whore. We're
talking about disqualification.

>>
>> The violent attack on the Capitol was an insurrection, regardless of whether
>> or not anyone is charged with that statutory crime.
>
> The Dems cheated.

They didn't. Trump cheated.

>
>>
>> Insurrection is not just a statutory crime, but also a description of a type
>> of event, and the violent assault on the Capitol of 01/06/2021 meets all the
>> criteria of being an insurrection. It was an insurrection, scooter.
>>
>
> You are

I am right. That's what I am.

[Scout]

"Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:A4CrN.221414$Ama9....@fx12.iad...

You say it's not necessary to judge... then you turn around and do so.

[Wilson Woods]

I say, correctly, that it is not necessary to charge and convict anyone for the
statutory crime of insurrection in order to judge that the *event* was an
insurrection. It was an insurrection, scooter, regardless of what crimes people
are charged with. Here's an example, scooter. *Former* county commissioner Couy
Griffin in New Mexico — "former" because he was disqualified and removed in a
civil trial — was only charged with and convicted for misdemeanor trespassing
during the insurrection. But it was an insurrection regardless of the charge,
scooter.

[Skeeter]

In article <mfSrN.44077$SyNd....@fx33.iad>, ban...@hotmail.com
says...

>
> On 1/23/2024 5:32 AM, Scout wrote:
> >
> >
> > "Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:A4CrN.221414$Ama9....@fx12.iad...
> >> On 1/22/2024 12:56 PM, scooter lied:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "Baxter" <bax02_s...@baxcode.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:uom2qa$phl5$4...@dont-email.me...
> >>>> Skeeter <Skeet...@proton.me> wrote in
> >>>> news:MPG.401833245...@usnews.blocknews.net:
> >>>>
> >>>>> In article <20240121.230...@erienetworks.net>,
> >>>>> rema...@domain.invalid says...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In article <uoh0rd$3oq4f$1...@dont-email.me>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > I'm the queer who follows Trump's dog to pick up turds when it
> >>>>>> shits.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If there were, the Justice Department would already have brought
> >>>>>> charges against him.
> >>>>>> You know insurrection is a crime, right?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So is rape and yet.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Just to recap, under Section 2383 of the federal criminal code, a

> >>>>>> person is guilty of a felony, punishable by up to ten yearsâ??

> >>>>>> imprisonment, if he
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 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 why do we need a refresher on this? Because the Department of
> >>>>>> Justice has been investigating Donald Trump and the January 6, 2021,
> >>>>>> Capitol riot for nearly three years, yet no insurrection charges
> >>>>>> have ever been brought against Trump ...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/09/there-is-no-insurrection-
> >>>>>> case-against-trump/
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ===============
> >>>>
> >>>> Why Jan. 6 insurrections sent a letter to the Folger Shakespeare Library
> >>>
> >>> Which of these have been convicted of insurrection?
> >>
> >> Not necessary to judge that the event *was* an insurrection, scooter. It was.
> >
> > You say it's not necessary to judge
>
> I say, correctly, that it is not necessary to charge and convict anyone for the
> statutory crime of insurrection in order to judge that the *event* was an
> insurrection. It was an insurrection, scooter, regardless of what crimes people
> are charged with. Here's an example, scooter. *Former* county commissioner Couy

> Griffin in New Mexico ? "former" because he was disqualified and removed in a
> civil trial ? was only charged with and convicted for misdemeanor trespassing

> during the insurrection. But it was an insurrection regardless of the charge,
> scooter.

Not until someone has been charged with it.

[Michael A Terrell]

On 1/23/2024 9:18 AM, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, convicted child
molester and another fucking do-nothing, lied:

That's false.

[Scout]

"Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:mfSrN.44077$SyNd....@fx33.iad...

No, that's merely an opinion... and we know what opinions are like..

Meanwhile back to the subject we are speaking of the law, were personal
options, particularly considering whether a crime occurred isn't a matter of
opinion.

[Wilson Woods]

On 1/23/2024 10:17 AM, scooter lied:

>
>
> "Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:mfSrN.44077$SyNd....@fx33.iad...

>> On 1/23/2024 5:32 AM, scooter lied:

No, scooter, it's a statement of fact.

[Scout]

"Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:1lVrN.44870$Iswd....@fx05.iad...

Claiming your assertions are factual is just another opinion.

[Wilson Woods]

On 1/24/2024 6:02 AM, scooter lied:

I didn't, scooter.

[Scout]

"Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:NO9sN.53944$5Hnd....@fx03.iad...

Rudy admits his claims are lies.

[Wilson Woods]

No, scooter. Once again, scooter, *whenever* you say that your Usenet opponent —
your better in every dimension — "admits" something, you're lying. Your Usenet
opponent — your better — has never "admitted" what you claim he has. You're
always lying when you use that construction, scooter.

[Skeeter]

In article <deesN.68809$GX69...@fx46.iad>, ban...@hotmail.com says...

> >>>>>>>>>>>> person is guilty of a felony, punishable by up to ten yearsâ??

> >>>>>>>>>>>> imprisonment, if he
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 why do we need a refresher on this? Because the Department of
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Justice has been investigating Donald Trump and the January 6, 2021,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot for nearly three years, yet no insurrection charges
> >>>>>>>>>>>> have ever been brought against Trump ...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/09/there-is-no-insurrection-
> >>>>>>>>>>>> case-against-trump/
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> ===============
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Why Jan. 6 insurrections sent a letter to the Folger Shakespeare Library
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Which of these have been convicted of insurrection?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Not necessary to judge that the event *was* an insurrection, scooter. It
> >>>>>>>> was.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> You say it's not necessary to judge
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I say, correctly, that it is not necessary to charge and convict anyone
> >>>>>> for the statutory crime of insurrection in order to judge that the *event*
> >>>>>> was an insurrection.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No, that's merely an opinion
> >>>>
> >>>> No, scooter, it's a statement of fact.
> >>>
> >>> Claiming your assertions are factual
> >>
> >> I didn't,
> >
> > Rudy admits
>

> No, scooter. Once again, scooter, *whenever* you say that your Usenet opponent ?
> your better in every dimension ? "admits" something, you're lying. Your Usenet
> opponent ? your better ? has never "admitted" what you claim he has. You're

> always lying when you use that construction, scooter.

You lost credibility when you started editing and snipping. You are just
a kick toy.

[Michael A Terrell]

On 1/24/2024 12:56 PM, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, convicted child

molester and another fucking do-nothing, lied:

> In article <deesN.68809$GX69...@fx46.iad>, ban...@hotmail.com says...
>>

>> On 1/24/2024 9:05 AM, scooter lied:

No.

[Scout]

"Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:deesN.68809$GX69...@fx46.iad...

Then why did you admit it?

[Wilson Woods]

On 1/25/2024 8:04 AM, scooter lied:

>> No, scooter. Once again, scooter, *whenever* you say that your Usenet opponent —
>> your better in every dimension — "admits" something, you're lying. Your Usenet
>> opponent — your better — has never "admitted" what you claim he has. You're
>> always lying when you use that construction, scooter.
>

> Then why did you admit it?

Why do you lie and say someone has "admitted" something that he hasn't, scooter?
*Every* time you say your opponent — your better in every dimension — "admits"
something, you're lying. Why do you keep telling that same lie, scooter?

[Scout]

"Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:RIxsN.255942$Wp_8....@fx17.iad...

Only you can answer why you lie all the time.

[Wilson Woods]

On 1/25/2024 11:01 AM, scooter lied:

>> Why do you lie and say someone has "admitted" something that he hasn't, scooter?
>> *Every* time you say your opponent — your better in every dimension — "admits"
>> something, you're lying. Why do you keep telling that same lie, scooter?
>

> Only you can answer why

No, you're the one lying, scooter, and you're the one who needs to explain why
you do it.

To reiterate, whenever you say "Rudy admits...", you're lying. I have never
"admitted" what you lie and claim I admit.

"Rudy admits..." is one of your scooterisms that prove your shitty thinking.

[Skeeter]

In article <LkzsN.36872$Wbff...@fx37.iad>, ban...@hotmail.com says...

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person is guilty of a felony, punishable by up to ten yearsâ??

> >>>> opponent ? your better in every dimension ? "admits" something, you're
> >>>> lying. Your Usenet opponent ? your better ? has never "admitted" what you

> >>>> claim he has. You're always lying when you use that construction, scooter.
> >>>
> >>> Then why did you admit it?
> >>
> >> Why do you lie and say someone has "admitted" something that he hasn't, scooter?

> >> *Every* time you say your opponent ? your better in every dimension ? "admits"

> >> something, you're lying. Why do you keep telling that same lie, scooter?
> >
> > Only you can answer why
>
> No, you're the one lying, scooter, and you're the one who needs to explain why
> you do it.
>
> To reiterate, whenever you say "Rudy admits...", you're lying. I have never
> "admitted" what you lie and claim I admit.
>
> "Rudy admits..." is one of your scooterisms that prove your shitty thinking.

You said I admitted a lot of things without posting proof. Hypocrite.

[Wilson Woods]

On 1/25/2024 11:01 AM, scooter lied:

>> Why do you lie and say someone has "admitted" something that he hasn't, scooter?
>> *Every* time you say your opponent — your better in every dimension — "admits"
>> something, you're lying. Why do you keep telling that same lie, scooter?
>

> Only you can answer why

[Skeeter]

In article <SHQsN.385962$83n7....@fx18.iad>, ban...@hotmail.com
says...

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person is guilty of a felony, punishable by up to ten yearsâ??

> >>>> opponent ? your better in every dimension ? "admits" something, you're
> >>>> lying. Your Usenet opponent ? your better ? has never "admitted" what you

> >>>> claim he has. You're always lying when you use that construction, scooter.
> >>>
> >>> Then why did you admit it?
> >>
> >> Why do you lie and say someone has "admitted" something that he hasn't, scooter?

> >> *Every* time you say your opponent ? your better in every dimension ? "admits"

> >> something, you're lying. Why do you keep telling that same lie, scooter?
> >
> > Only you can answer why
>
> No, you're the one lying, scooter, and you're the one who needs to explain why
> you do it.
>
> To reiterate, whenever you say "Rudy admits...", you're lying. I have never
> "admitted" what you lie and claim I admit.
>
> "Rudy admits..." is one of your scooterisms that prove your shitty thinking.

Why do you ignore me when I ask about how you say I "admitted" to
spending time in jail. You said I "admitted" I was a child molester like
you say in your stupid opening. Yet you can't show us where I
"admitted" anything. Why do you call out people for the same shit you
do? You're a fake.