That’s what it sounded like. A magistrate judge refused to issue a warrant, saying the government did not show probable cause. The government then asked a higher federal judge to intervene, but higher federal judges also blocked the warrant. So it looks like they went to a grand jury for an indictment instead. A good time to remind people that a federal judge found the DOJ’s conduct in the Comey case had serious issues with how evidence and legal instructions were presented to the grand jury, including misstatements of law, and ultimately threw out the indictment.
Biden’s admin hate rhetoric on social media? I don’t recall anything like that. Can you provide some examples? Fed government social media accounts were, as I recall, always professional. That is no longer the case. Government social media accounts are now extremely political and unprofessional. ps. Gov social media unprofessionalism reflects badly on the administration, but that’s nothing compared to weaponizing the DOJ to go after people for behavior it doesn’t like or for politics. They’re not in the same sphere of harm done by the administration
So Russia gate? Don’t act like it hasn’t been both sides. That is being disingenuous. The countless charges against Trump that ended up being discharged? This isn’t a political sided argument. Both sides do it and it’s no bueno.
But Russia Gate was real because they did interfere with the 2016 election and Trump benefited from that. You can't both sides this. The Republicans are clearly the ones doing all the fascism now.
Lawfare is catching up with the dumb dems. You laugh and rejoice when the other team gets shot in the neck, but when it happens to yours, you cry like little b****es. Same story here.
Storming into a church to force feed the parishioners with your woke BS is not acceptable in this country. Enough is enough. These church goers are the BEDROCK of our society -- they are the people who make communities work. The far left agitators went too far. Their crimes must be punished if we seek to preserve our values and culture in western society... and not cede them to liberal lunatics who cannot form civilized societies. GOOD DAY
The both sides argument is one that is an exercise in normalization and a side door for approval or at best looking the other way. Both sides are not the same. Trump had a letter of intent directly with the Kremlin to build a Trump tower Moscow during the 16 campaign while it was proven that Moscow was trying to help Trump get elected. That alone is a massive conflict that should be investigated. If in 2023 Kamala’s husband had a letter of intent with the Iranian government while the Iranians were found out to be helping Kamala get elected so they could start up a legal project that would have put millions of dollars in Kamala’s husbands pocket would you have sat here and said that this isn’t something that needs to be investigated?? Also if you think Bush’s people didn’t investigate Obama on the down low back in 2007 then I have a bridge to sell you. Also Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn were found out to be completely compromised traitors. Flynn was found to be an agent of the Turkish government for crying out loud. Comey/Mueller’s team did Trump a favor by checking these guys out to make sure foreign agents weren’t in the White House. Also Trumps convictions were not overturned. They were dropped because it is DOJ policy (policy set by the Nixon legal counsel mind you) that a sitting president cannot be under indictment. They can only be impeached. It shows that either you are being purposefully misleading or you are wildly ignorant of the facts and shouldn’t be so strongly convicted about something you are not informed of.
You are correct. Both sides are not the same. However, effectively, they are. People like yourself who keep defending your party are the PROBLEM.
I know leftists only agree that crime is a crime if affects the other side of the political fence but here's the basis : 1. Obstruction of Church Services (18 U.S.C. § 247) Federal law makes it a crime to: “Willfully obstruct, impede, or interfere with any person in the enjoyment of that person’s free exercise of religious beliefs, or with any religious institution.” That includes: Disrupting services Blocking access to a place of worship Intimidating worshippers because of religion So if people storm a church to stop the service or intimidate worshippers, prosecutors can charge them under this federal statute. Key point: You don’t need violence — just interference with someone’s free exercise of religion. ⚖️ 2. Civil Rights Violations (18 U.S.C. § 241 and § 242) These sections are about: Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights Deprivation of rights under “color of law” If attackers are trying to intimidate people based on race, religion, or other protected status, the government can treat it as a civil rights offense. This applies especially when: There’s coordinated planning There’s intent to prevent people from exercising rights (like worship) 3. Conspiracy Charges Even if individuals didn’t directly commit the act, federal prosecutors can charge: A conspiracy to violate federal law (18 U.S.C. § 371) That means: Two or more people agreed to do something illegal At least one overt act in furtherance of that plan This can apply to groups who organized the invasion even if they weren’t physically present. 4. Use of Force, Threats, or Weapons If weapons or credible threats were involved, that opens other federal charges like: Assault on federal property or officers Use of a deadly weapon during a civil rights violation
You didn’t provide any example to support your claim that Biden’s administration used hate rhetoric on social media. I take it that you have none, which makes your claim false. As I recall, government social media under Biden was always professional, unlike what we see under the current administration. Regarding “Russian-gate,” it has two parts. First, the GOP-led Senate investigation and report into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Second, the GOP-led DOJ investigation by Special Counsel Mueller into Trump’s removal of Comey for possible obstruction of justice. Both investigations were started when the GOP controlled the Senate and the DoJ. It is wrong to describe these actions as Democrat-led, because the facts show they were GOP-led and bipartisan. As they were GOP-led, these were clearly not partisan-led investigations. The claim that both sides do it is not supported by evidence. It is often used to normalize the bad behavior of one side by incorrectly asserting that the other side does the same, when in fact they do not.
Trump pardoned the J6ers so don't act like you care about the law now. That was a real riot. This was just some people going into a church and yelling ICE OUT a bunch of time. Property was not defaced and there was no violence. Lemon was there as a journalist. He repeatedly said he wasn't an activist and was there just covering the event. This is about protecting the 1st amendment right to free speech and having a free press. Just come out and say you hate black people and don't care about democracy in this country. Be honest about your bigotry.
“This was just people yelling ‘ICE OUT’ — no violence, no damage” This is where YOUR legal misunderstanding is. Federal law (18 U.S.C. § 247) protects people’s right to worship without interference or intimidation. You don’t need: Broken windows Assault Arson If people enter a church during religious activity with the intent to disrupt or intimidate worshippers, that can qualify as criminal interference with religious exercise. “Free speech doesn’t include the right to storm into someone else’s religious service and disrupt it. The location and intent matter.”
“This is about the First Amendment” The First Amendment protects: ✔ Protesting ✔ Speaking in public spaces ✔ Criticizing the government It does not give people the right to: ❌ Trespass ❌ Disrupt private gatherings ❌ Interfere with others’ constitutional rights (like freedom of religion)
Every day we need to remind these woke little biitches in here that they lost the election. Kameltoe/Tampon Tim for 2028. Do it Dems, that’s your winning ticket.
Right now it's very easy to charge a lot of people there -but the Don does have one ace in his sleeve and it's his journalism card ... What behavior could, if present, make a criminal charge more plausible If, instead, there is credible evidence that Don Lemon actually did one or more of these things, then prosecutors would have a stronger legal basis to charge him: 1. Actively encouraged or directed the disruptive conduct Giving commands like “Get in there!” Chanting with the group inside Coordinating movements or tactics 2. Acted as part of an organized plan to disrupt the service Communicated with others in planning ahead of time Helped orchestrate where people would go, what they would do 3. Participated in obstructive or intimidating actions Blocking exits, pushing through the congregation Physically interfering with worshippers Encouraging others to disrupt rather than just documenting 4. Aided unlawful conduct beyond passive observation Helping protesters enter restricted areas Sharing plans or tactics with individuals engaged in the disruption If prosecutors could present evidence of these kinds of actions, then that conduct moves from “journalistic presence” toward participation in an unlawful event ~ either way it needs to be investigated and all these people that clearly violating laws need to be investigated. Phone records and everything should be transparent.
Dude this guy would have been thrown off a building in any other country for that @basso @Salvy @Space Ghost This dude should be happy he’s going to b surrounded by dudes who really wants to see him
What they did wasn't against the law. It's a church open to the public. Anyone could go inside. If you disrupt a service, you can be asked to leave. If you don't, then the police can be called and you can be arrested. A pastor did ask them to leave, and they eventually moved outside. The police or local law enforcement were not called, and no one was arrested during the protest. And, you just completely ignored the point about Lemon being there as a journalist covering the event. He wasn't a protester. Trump's DOJ is just using this to get back at critics and intimidate other journalists that speak out against his administration.
No, and those protesters are idiots for disrupting the church service, no matter what the pastor believes. The State is going after a reporter as an organizer of the criminal conspiracy (??), though it’s not clear what exactly they’re charging since the charges haven’t been released publicly. But whatever it is, judges didn’t buy it and refused to grant an arrest warrant. I wouldn’t be surprised if the grand jury is misled again by this DoJ, but we’ll see.
