Capitol Hill Riots

Halifax2TheMax

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Funny how some get so offended when not even quoted, eh? OMG, an opinion I don't agree with! The horror!

I quoted you because of the after comment.  If you didn't direct that first part at me then I'll move on.

I'm not offended at all, you're still a tool.

Grasping. 

So did you you or didn't you direct your tirade at me?

Tirade? Because I think you made a lame attempt at minimizing something by asking "how many?" What if it were one person and the result was the same? Say, one person with an assault rifle and a few hundred rounds of armor piercing ammo? Almost a month later and we're debating "how many got inside." Like it makes a fucking difference. Tirade. Tool. You seem stuck on Ts today, Tempo. Tirade. Tool. Tirading Tool. Tooling Tirader. Tirading Tool Tooling Tiraded. FFS. I'll respectfully ask, do you watch the news? Did you not see the countless hours of footage from inside the capitol? Seems to me to be more than 200. But again, what fucking difference does it make?

So I'll ask again.  Was your tirade directed at me or will you deflect a simple answer again?

I didn't direct a "tirade" at anyone, Tempo.

Halifax2TheMax

mrussel1 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

What about the ones that climbed through windows? Do they count?

They were invited in

After flashing badges? And do they count too? Or just the ones through the busted down doors?

tempo_n_groove

PJNB said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Gern Blansten said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/doj-capitol-rioters-charges-debate/2021/01/23/3b0cf112-5d97-11eb-8bcf-3877871c819d_story.html

Federal officials estimate that roughly 800 people surged into the building, though they caution that such numbers are imprecise, and the real figure could be 100 people or more in either direction.

Can you post the article.  I tried to get access and won't let me.

By 

Devlin Barrett and 

Spencer S. Hsu

Jan. 23, 2021 at 2:21 p.m. AST

Federal law enforcement officials are privately debating whether they should decline to charge some of the individuals who stormed the U.S. Capitol this month — a politically loaded proposition but one alert to the practical concern that hundreds of such cases could swamp the local courthouse.

The internal discussions are in their early stages, and no decisions have been reached about whether to forgo charging some of those who illegally entered the Capitol on Jan. 6, according to multiple people familiar with the discussions.

Justice Department officials have promised a relentless effort to identify and arrest those who stormed the Capitol that day, but internally there is robust back-and-forth about whether charging them all is the best course of action. That debate comes at a time when officials are keenly sensitive that the credibility of the Justice Department and the FBI are at stake in such decisions, given the apparent security and intelligence failures that preceded the riot, these people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss legal deliberations.

Trump entertained plan to install an attorney general who would help him pursue baseless election fraud claims

Federal officials estimate that roughly 800 people surged into the building, though they caution that such numbers are imprecise, and the real figure could be 100 people or more in either direction.

Default Mono Sans Mono Serif Sans Serif Comic Fancy Small Caps

Default X-Small Small Medium Large X-Large XX-Large

Default Outline Dark Outline Light Outline Dark Bold Outline Light Bold Shadow Dark Shadow Light Shadow Dark Bold Shadow Light Bold

Default Black Silver Gray White Maroon Red Purple Fuchsia Green Lime Olive Yellow Navy Blue Teal Aqua OrangeDefault 100% 75% 50% 25% 0%

Default Black Silver Gray White Maroon Red Purple Fuchsia Green Lime Olive Yellow Navy Blue Teal Aqua OrangeDefault 100% 75% 50% 25% 0%

41 minutes of fear: A video timeline from inside the Capitol siege

The Post obtained hours of video footage, some exclusively, and placed it within a digital 3-D model of the building. (TWP)

AD

Among those roughly 800 people, FBI agents and prosecutors have so far seen a broad mix of behavior — from people dressed for military battle, moving in formation, to wanton vandalism, to simply going with the crowd into the building.

FBI report warned of ‘war’ day before Capitol riot

Due to the wide variety of behavior, some federal officials have argued internally that those people who are known only to have committed unlawful entry — and were not engaged in violent, threatening or destructive behavior — should not be charged, according to people familiar with the discussions.

Psaki says administration will take action against ‘domestic violent extremism’ after Capitol riot

White House press secretary Jen Psaki on Jan. 22 announced the National Security Council will build new capability to focus on domestic extremism. (The Washington Post)

Other agents and prosecutors have pushed back against that suggestion, arguing that it is important to send a forceful message that the kind of political violence and mayhem on display Jan. 6 needs to be punished to the full extent of the law, so as to discourage similar conduct in the future.

AD

There are a host of other factors complicating the discussions, many of which center not around the politics of the riot, but the real-world work of investigators and prosecutors, these people said.

The Justice Department has already charged more than 135 individuals with committing crimes in or around the Capitol building, and many more are expected to be charged in the coming weeks and months. By mid-January, the FBI had already received more than 200,000 tips from the public about the riot, in addition to news footage and police officer testimony.

“There is absolute resolve from the Department of Justice to hold all who intentionally engaged in criminal acts at the Capitol accountable,” Justice Department spokesman Marc Raimondi said in an email. “We have consistently made clear that we will follow the facts and evidence and charge individuals accordingly. We remain confident that the U.S. District Court for Washington, DC can appropriately handle the docket related to any resulting charges.”

AD

The primary objective for authorities is to determine which individuals, if any, planned, orchestrated or directed the violence. To that end, the FBI has already found worrying linkages within such extremist groups as the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and Three Percenters, and is looking to see if those groups coordinated with each other to storm the building, according to people familiar with the investigation.

Prosecutors have signaled they are looking to bring charges of seditious conspiracy against anyone who planned and carried out violence aimed at the government — a charge that carries a maximum possible prison sentence of 20 years.

Evidence builds against self-styled militia members

But even as Justice Department officials look to bring those types of cases, they privately acknowledge those more determined and dangerous individuals may have operated within a broader sea of people who rushed through the doors but didn’t do much else, and prosecutors will ultimately have to decide if all of those lesser offenders should be charged.

AD

Officials insisted they are not under pressure in regards to timing of decisions about how to handle those type of cases. For one thing, investigators are still gathering evidence, and agents could easily turn up additional photos or online postings that show a person they initially believed was harmless had, in fact, encouraged or engaged in other crimes.

Investigators also expect that some of those charged in the riot will eventually cooperate and provide evidence against others, and that could change their understanding of what certain people said or did that day, these people said.

Nevertheless, these people said, some in federal law enforcement are concerned that charging people solely with unlawful entry, when they are not known to have committed any other bad acts, could lead to losses if they go to trial.

AD

“If an old man says all he did was walk in and no one tried to stop him, and he walked out and no one tried to stop him, and that’s all we know about what he did, that’s a case we may not win,” one official said.

Another official noted most of those arrested so far have no criminal records.

Meanwhile, defense lawyers for some of those charged are contemplating something akin to a “Trump defense” — that the president or other authority figures gave them permission or invited them to commit an otherwise illegal act.

“If you think of yourself as a soldier doing the bidding of the commander in chief, you don’t try to hide your actions. You assume you will be held up as a hero by the nation,” criminal defense lawyers Teri Kanefield and Mark Reichel wrote last week.

Such a defense might not forestall charges but could be effective at trial or sentencing. Trump’s looming impeachment trial in the Senate will also focus further attention on his actions and raise questions about the culpability of followers for the misinformation spread by leaders around bogus election-fraud claims rejected by courts and state voting officials.

AD

“It’s not a like a bunch of people gathered on their own and decided to do this, it’s not like a mob. It’s people who were asked to come by the president, encouraged to come by the president, and encouraged to do what they did by the president and a number of others,” said one attorney representing defendants charged in the breach who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss legal strategy.

Prosecutors have other options. For rioters with no previous criminal records or convictions and whose known behavior inside the Capitol was not violent or destructive, the government could enter into deferred plea agreements, a diversion program akin to pretrial probation in which prosecutors agree to drop charges if a defendant commits no offenses over a certain time period.

Such a resolution would not result in even a misdemeanor conviction, and has been used before in some cases involving individuals with a history of mental illness who were arrested for jumping the White House fence. Criminal defense attorneys note there may be further distinctions between individuals who may have witnessed illegal activity or otherwise had reason to know they were entering a restricted area, and those for whom prosecutors can’t show such awareness.

AD

There is also a question over whether charging all of the rioters could swamp the federal court system. In 2019, D.C. federal courts recorded only about 430 criminal cases, and fewer than 300 last year, when the legal system slowed significantly due to the pandemic. Many of those cases, however, had multiple defendants.

The workload of prosecuting the rioters could be eased if some of the cases were farmed out to other U.S. attorney offices around the country, but so far D.C. prosecutors have shown no interest in doing so. The law generally requires that individuals be prosecuted in the district in which a crime occurred.

“The crime happened here. Prosecutors and judges can see the crime scene from their office windows. I find it strange anyone would suggest it be done anywhere else,” a person familiar with the investigation said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss an internal debate.

Beyond all the evidence-gathering and charging decisions left to do, federal officials concede there will likely be some number of people who were there that day and are simply never identified, due to some combination of luck, masks or lack of social media posts.

TY.

So minimum 700 people.  More than I thought were in there.

dankind

tempo_n_groove said:

dankind said:

tempo_n_groove said:

The Juggler said:

tempo_n_groove said:

tbergs said:

The Juggler said:

Seems like a lot of radicalized people to me

Around 200 or so. That's Trump math there. "A lot of people are saying...", "Everyone knows...", "The biggest..." Until large numbers equal bad, then it's just a few out of the masses. Everyone past the barricades "stormed" the capitol. Not all made it in, but the whole thing was treasonous.

200 got inside, broke through the doors down...

My god man, if someone can find me a better number let me know because I really just want to know, that's all.  Just curious.

Everyone of the people you see in that picture stormed the capitol. Not all of them got inside the actual building, THANK GOD. But everyone of the people you see above is a fucking terrorist traitor who deserves to be prosecuted to the fullest extent the law allows. 

I agree with you and I still want to know how many got inside...  That's all.  I just wanted to know.  Not sure how my question got twisted sideways?

I swear people look at an angle for things that aren't there.  I seem to get this quite a bit when I ask a question.

It's because you're an asshole, Chris. I thought you knew that.

lol, THAT I do know!

Because if you need a reminder:

HughFreakingDillon

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Merkin Baller said:

Gern Blansten said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Merkin Baller said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Question.

How many people did it look like stormed the Capital?

I am now hearing a few thousand perhaps.  

How many actually got in?  200?

Just curious if numbers were thrown around.

If that’s the case, could it be said that it was “mostly peaceful”?  /s

the rally and the capital riot were two different events. 

the rally looked peaceful. the riot was not. see, they were separate events. 

They built a gallows. 

weird. i didn't see a gallows at the RALLY. 

I'm not sure that it would have functioned correctly but they put up a wooden structure with a noose

Agreed, but considering the way they stormed the building and the violence they inflicted upon the police officers, I think the crowd loses the benefit of the doubt that the gallows was merely symbolic. 

It should be assumed their intent was exactly what they declared, to "Hang Mike Pence". 

agreed

100%.  This was not a joke. 

i never thought it was a joke. but it wasn't symbolic of the entire crowd. 

mrussel1

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Merkin Baller said:

Gern Blansten said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Merkin Baller said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Question.

How many people did it look like stormed the Capital?

I am now hearing a few thousand perhaps.  

How many actually got in?  200?

Just curious if numbers were thrown around.

If that’s the case, could it be said that it was “mostly peaceful”?  /s

the rally and the capital riot were two different events. 

the rally looked peaceful. the riot was not. see, they were separate events. 

They built a gallows. 

weird. i didn't see a gallows at the RALLY. 

I'm not sure that it would have functioned correctly but they put up a wooden structure with a noose

Agreed, but considering the way they stormed the building and the violence they inflicted upon the police officers, I think the crowd loses the benefit of the doubt that the gallows was merely symbolic. 

It should be assumed their intent was exactly what they declared, to "Hang Mike Pence". 

agreed

100%.  This was not a joke. 

i never thought it was a joke. but it wasn't symbolic of the entire crowd. 

Of course not, but it doesn't take many to commit the crime.  The more nefarious ones were leveraging the power of the mob.  I don't know exactly where this discussion is going or trying to go, but if a person entered the Capitol grounds with the intention of disrupting the counting of the EC, you committing sedition, by statute.  You don't have to want to kill someone, break anything, steal anything to be seditious.  And if you communicated with someone about that intent, it's seditious conspiracy.  These are felonies and if guilty, revoke your voting and firearm privileges for life, unless you receive some dispensation. 

HughFreakingDillon

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Funny how some get so offended when not even quoted, eh? OMG, an opinion I don't agree with! The horror!

I quoted you because of the after comment.  If you didn't direct that first part at me then I'll move on.

I'm not offended at all, you're still a tool.

Grasping. 

So did you you or didn't you direct your tirade at me?

Tirade? Because I think you made a lame attempt at minimizing something by asking "how many?" What if it were one person and the result was the same? Say, one person with an assault rifle and a few hundred rounds of armor piercing ammo? Almost a month later and we're debating "how many got inside." Like it makes a fucking difference. Tirade. Tool. You seem stuck on Ts today, Tempo. Tirade. Tool. Tirading Tool. Tooling Tirader. Tirading Tool Tooling Tiraded. FFS. I'll respectfully ask, do you watch the news? Did you not see the countless hours of footage from inside the capitol? Seems to me to be more than 200. But again, what fucking difference does it make?

so let's back this up: the guy got his facts wrong, he gets trashed for it. he then asks for facts, and now those facts are irrelevant? and how is asking for facts "minimizing" in your head?

I'd say the difference between 200 and 10,000 is quite a fucking bit. and relevant. no matter the number, yes, they were all traitorous pieces of trash. but I think factual questions should be THE MINIMUM expectation around here. 

HughFreakingDillon

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Merkin Baller said:

Gern Blansten said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Merkin Baller said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Question.

How many people did it look like stormed the Capital?

I am now hearing a few thousand perhaps.  

How many actually got in?  200?

Just curious if numbers were thrown around.

If that’s the case, could it be said that it was “mostly peaceful”?  /s

the rally and the capital riot were two different events. 

the rally looked peaceful. the riot was not. see, they were separate events. 

They built a gallows. 

weird. i didn't see a gallows at the RALLY. 

I'm not sure that it would have functioned correctly but they put up a wooden structure with a noose

Agreed, but considering the way they stormed the building and the violence they inflicted upon the police officers, I think the crowd loses the benefit of the doubt that the gallows was merely symbolic. 

It should be assumed their intent was exactly what they declared, to "Hang Mike Pence". 

agreed

100%.  This was not a joke. 

i never thought it was a joke. but it wasn't symbolic of the entire crowd. 

Of course not, but it doesn't take many to commit the crime.  The more nefarious ones were leveraging the power of the mob.  I don't know exactly where this discussion is going or trying to go, but if a person entered the Capitol grounds with the intention of disrupting the counting of the EC, you committing sedition, by statute.  You don't have to want to kill someone, break anything, steal anything to be seditious.  And if you communicated with someone about that intent, it's seditious conspiracy.  These are felonies and if guilty, revoke your voting and firearm privileges for life, unless you receive some dispensation. 

yeah, i know all that. i also have no idea where the hell this is going. 

mrussel1

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Merkin Baller said:

Gern Blansten said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Merkin Baller said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Question.

How many people did it look like stormed the Capital?

I am now hearing a few thousand perhaps.  

How many actually got in?  200?

Just curious if numbers were thrown around.

If that’s the case, could it be said that it was “mostly peaceful”?  /s

the rally and the capital riot were two different events. 

the rally looked peaceful. the riot was not. see, they were separate events. 

They built a gallows. 

weird. i didn't see a gallows at the RALLY. 

I'm not sure that it would have functioned correctly but they put up a wooden structure with a noose

Agreed, but considering the way they stormed the building and the violence they inflicted upon the police officers, I think the crowd loses the benefit of the doubt that the gallows was merely symbolic. 

It should be assumed their intent was exactly what they declared, to "Hang Mike Pence". 

agreed

100%.  This was not a joke. 

i never thought it was a joke. but it wasn't symbolic of the entire crowd. 

Of course not, but it doesn't take many to commit the crime.  The more nefarious ones were leveraging the power of the mob.  I don't know exactly where this discussion is going or trying to go, but if a person entered the Capitol grounds with the intention of disrupting the counting of the EC, you committing sedition, by statute.  You don't have to want to kill someone, break anything, steal anything to be seditious.  And if you communicated with someone about that intent, it's seditious conspiracy.  These are felonies and if guilty, revoke your voting and firearm privileges for life, unless you receive some dispensation. 

yeah, i know all that. i also have no idea where the hell this is going. 

Okay, we're all together on being confused.

HughFreakingDillon

tbergs said:

The Juggler said:

Seems like a lot of radicalized people to me

Around 200 or so. That's Trump math there. "A lot of people are saying...", "Everyone knows...", "The biggest..." Until large numbers equal bad, then it's just a few out of the masses. Everyone past the barricades "stormed" the capitol. Not all made it in, but the whole thing was treasonous.

tempo never said the picture above was 200. he actually said something in the thousands were outside the capitol, but was asking about how many were INSIDE. does everyone understand the word INSIDE?? and asking how many were inside is not "minimizing". 

some people just like facts. 

kinda hard having a factual discussion without,...you know.....FACTS. 

HughFreakingDillon

personally, AOC's account to me sounds terrifying. given the known hatred of her by the extreme right, she was right in her fear for her life. 

The Juggler

PJNB said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Gern Blansten said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/doj-capitol-rioters-charges-debate/2021/01/23/3b0cf112-5d97-11eb-8bcf-3877871c819d_story.html

Federal officials estimate that roughly 800 people surged into the building, though they caution that such numbers are imprecise, and the real figure could be 100 people or more in either direction.

Can you post the article.  I tried to get access and won't let me.

By 

Devlin Barrett and 

Spencer S. Hsu

Jan. 23, 2021 at 2:21 p.m. AST

Federal law enforcement officials are privately debating whether they should decline to charge some of the individuals who stormed the U.S. Capitol this month — a politically loaded proposition but one alert to the practical concern that hundreds of such cases could swamp the local courthouse.

The internal discussions are in their early stages, and no decisions have been reached about whether to forgo charging some of those who illegally entered the Capitol on Jan. 6, according to multiple people familiar with the discussions.

Justice Department officials have promised a relentless effort to identify and arrest those who stormed the Capitol that day, but internally there is robust back-and-forth about whether charging them all is the best course of action. That debate comes at a time when officials are keenly sensitive that the credibility of the Justice Department and the FBI are at stake in such decisions, given the apparent security and intelligence failures that preceded the riot, these people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss legal deliberations.

Trump entertained plan to install an attorney general who would help him pursue baseless election fraud claims

Federal officials estimate that roughly 800 people surged into the building, though they caution that such numbers are imprecise, and the real figure could be 100 people or more in either direction.

Default Mono Sans Mono Serif Sans Serif Comic Fancy Small Caps

Default X-Small Small Medium Large X-Large XX-Large

Default Outline Dark Outline Light Outline Dark Bold Outline Light Bold Shadow Dark Shadow Light Shadow Dark Bold Shadow Light Bold

Default Black Silver Gray White Maroon Red Purple Fuchsia Green Lime Olive Yellow Navy Blue Teal Aqua OrangeDefault 100% 75% 50% 25% 0%

Default Black Silver Gray White Maroon Red Purple Fuchsia Green Lime Olive Yellow Navy Blue Teal Aqua OrangeDefault 100% 75% 50% 25% 0%

41 minutes of fear: A video timeline from inside the Capitol siege

The Post obtained hours of video footage, some exclusively, and placed it within a digital 3-D model of the building. (TWP)

AD

Among those roughly 800 people, FBI agents and prosecutors have so far seen a broad mix of behavior — from people dressed for military battle, moving in formation, to wanton vandalism, to simply going with the crowd into the building.

FBI report warned of ‘war’ day before Capitol riot

Due to the wide variety of behavior, some federal officials have argued internally that those people who are known only to have committed unlawful entry — and were not engaged in violent, threatening or destructive behavior — should not be charged, according to people familiar with the discussions.

Psaki says administration will take action against ‘domestic violent extremism’ after Capitol riot

White House press secretary Jen Psaki on Jan. 22 announced the National Security Council will build new capability to focus on domestic extremism. (The Washington Post)

Other agents and prosecutors have pushed back against that suggestion, arguing that it is important to send a forceful message that the kind of political violence and mayhem on display Jan. 6 needs to be punished to the full extent of the law, so as to discourage similar conduct in the future.

AD

There are a host of other factors complicating the discussions, many of which center not around the politics of the riot, but the real-world work of investigators and prosecutors, these people said.

The Justice Department has already charged more than 135 individuals with committing crimes in or around the Capitol building, and many more are expected to be charged in the coming weeks and months. By mid-January, the FBI had already received more than 200,000 tips from the public about the riot, in addition to news footage and police officer testimony.

“There is absolute resolve from the Department of Justice to hold all who intentionally engaged in criminal acts at the Capitol accountable,” Justice Department spokesman Marc Raimondi said in an email. “We have consistently made clear that we will follow the facts and evidence and charge individuals accordingly. We remain confident that the U.S. District Court for Washington, DC can appropriately handle the docket related to any resulting charges.”

AD

The primary objective for authorities is to determine which individuals, if any, planned, orchestrated or directed the violence. To that end, the FBI has already found worrying linkages within such extremist groups as the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and Three Percenters, and is looking to see if those groups coordinated with each other to storm the building, according to people familiar with the investigation.

Prosecutors have signaled they are looking to bring charges of seditious conspiracy against anyone who planned and carried out violence aimed at the government — a charge that carries a maximum possible prison sentence of 20 years.

Evidence builds against self-styled militia members

But even as Justice Department officials look to bring those types of cases, they privately acknowledge those more determined and dangerous individuals may have operated within a broader sea of people who rushed through the doors but didn’t do much else, and prosecutors will ultimately have to decide if all of those lesser offenders should be charged.

AD

Officials insisted they are not under pressure in regards to timing of decisions about how to handle those type of cases. For one thing, investigators are still gathering evidence, and agents could easily turn up additional photos or online postings that show a person they initially believed was harmless had, in fact, encouraged or engaged in other crimes.

Investigators also expect that some of those charged in the riot will eventually cooperate and provide evidence against others, and that could change their understanding of what certain people said or did that day, these people said.

Nevertheless, these people said, some in federal law enforcement are concerned that charging people solely with unlawful entry, when they are not known to have committed any other bad acts, could lead to losses if they go to trial.

AD

“If an old man says all he did was walk in and no one tried to stop him, and he walked out and no one tried to stop him, and that’s all we know about what he did, that’s a case we may not win,” one official said.

Another official noted most of those arrested so far have no criminal records.

Meanwhile, defense lawyers for some of those charged are contemplating something akin to a “Trump defense” — that the president or other authority figures gave them permission or invited them to commit an otherwise illegal act.

“If you think of yourself as a soldier doing the bidding of the commander in chief, you don’t try to hide your actions. You assume you will be held up as a hero by the nation,” criminal defense lawyers Teri Kanefield and Mark Reichel wrote last week.

Such a defense might not forestall charges but could be effective at trial or sentencing. Trump’s looming impeachment trial in the Senate will also focus further attention on his actions and raise questions about the culpability of followers for the misinformation spread by leaders around bogus election-fraud claims rejected by courts and state voting officials.

AD

“It’s not a like a bunch of people gathered on their own and decided to do this, it’s not like a mob. It’s people who were asked to come by the president, encouraged to come by the president, and encouraged to do what they did by the president and a number of others,” said one attorney representing defendants charged in the breach who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss legal strategy.

Prosecutors have other options. For rioters with no previous criminal records or convictions and whose known behavior inside the Capitol was not violent or destructive, the government could enter into deferred plea agreements, a diversion program akin to pretrial probation in which prosecutors agree to drop charges if a defendant commits no offenses over a certain time period.

Such a resolution would not result in even a misdemeanor conviction, and has been used before in some cases involving individuals with a history of mental illness who were arrested for jumping the White House fence. Criminal defense attorneys note there may be further distinctions between individuals who may have witnessed illegal activity or otherwise had reason to know they were entering a restricted area, and those for whom prosecutors can’t show such awareness.

AD

There is also a question over whether charging all of the rioters could swamp the federal court system. In 2019, D.C. federal courts recorded only about 430 criminal cases, and fewer than 300 last year, when the legal system slowed significantly due to the pandemic. Many of those cases, however, had multiple defendants.

The workload of prosecuting the rioters could be eased if some of the cases were farmed out to other U.S. attorney offices around the country, but so far D.C. prosecutors have shown no interest in doing so. The law generally requires that individuals be prosecuted in the district in which a crime occurred.

“The crime happened here. Prosecutors and judges can see the crime scene from their office windows. I find it strange anyone would suggest it be done anywhere else,” a person familiar with the investigation said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss an internal debate.

Beyond all the evidence-gathering and charging decisions left to do, federal officials concede there will likely be some number of people who were there that day and are simply never identified, due to some combination of luck, masks or lack of social media posts.

Wow only 700-900 people invaded the capitol building?

LOL

HughFreakingDillon

The Juggler said:

PJNB said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Gern Blansten said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/doj-capitol-rioters-charges-debate/2021/01/23/3b0cf112-5d97-11eb-8bcf-3877871c819d_story.html

Federal officials estimate that roughly 800 people surged into the building, though they caution that such numbers are imprecise, and the real figure could be 100 people or more in either direction.

Can you post the article.  I tried to get access and won't let me.

By 

Devlin Barrett and 

Spencer S. Hsu

Jan. 23, 2021 at 2:21 p.m. AST

Federal law enforcement officials are privately debating whether they should decline to charge some of the individuals who stormed the U.S. Capitol this month — a politically loaded proposition but one alert to the practical concern that hundreds of such cases could swamp the local courthouse.

The internal discussions are in their early stages, and no decisions have been reached about whether to forgo charging some of those who illegally entered the Capitol on Jan. 6, according to multiple people familiar with the discussions.

Justice Department officials have promised a relentless effort to identify and arrest those who stormed the Capitol that day, but internally there is robust back-and-forth about whether charging them all is the best course of action. That debate comes at a time when officials are keenly sensitive that the credibility of the Justice Department and the FBI are at stake in such decisions, given the apparent security and intelligence failures that preceded the riot, these people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss legal deliberations.

Trump entertained plan to install an attorney general who would help him pursue baseless election fraud claims

Federal officials estimate that roughly 800 people surged into the building, though they caution that such numbers are imprecise, and the real figure could be 100 people or more in either direction.

Default Mono Sans Mono Serif Sans Serif Comic Fancy Small Caps

Default X-Small Small Medium Large X-Large XX-Large

Default Outline Dark Outline Light Outline Dark Bold Outline Light Bold Shadow Dark Shadow Light Shadow Dark Bold Shadow Light Bold

Default Black Silver Gray White Maroon Red Purple Fuchsia Green Lime Olive Yellow Navy Blue Teal Aqua OrangeDefault 100% 75% 50% 25% 0%

Default Black Silver Gray White Maroon Red Purple Fuchsia Green Lime Olive Yellow Navy Blue Teal Aqua OrangeDefault 100% 75% 50% 25% 0%

41 minutes of fear: A video timeline from inside the Capitol siege

The Post obtained hours of video footage, some exclusively, and placed it within a digital 3-D model of the building. (TWP)

AD

Among those roughly 800 people, FBI agents and prosecutors have so far seen a broad mix of behavior — from people dressed for military battle, moving in formation, to wanton vandalism, to simply going with the crowd into the building.

FBI report warned of ‘war’ day before Capitol riot

Due to the wide variety of behavior, some federal officials have argued internally that those people who are known only to have committed unlawful entry — and were not engaged in violent, threatening or destructive behavior — should not be charged, according to people familiar with the discussions.

Psaki says administration will take action against ‘domestic violent extremism’ after Capitol riot

White House press secretary Jen Psaki on Jan. 22 announced the National Security Council will build new capability to focus on domestic extremism. (The Washington Post)

Other agents and prosecutors have pushed back against that suggestion, arguing that it is important to send a forceful message that the kind of political violence and mayhem on display Jan. 6 needs to be punished to the full extent of the law, so as to discourage similar conduct in the future.

AD

There are a host of other factors complicating the discussions, many of which center not around the politics of the riot, but the real-world work of investigators and prosecutors, these people said.

The Justice Department has already charged more than 135 individuals with committing crimes in or around the Capitol building, and many more are expected to be charged in the coming weeks and months. By mid-January, the FBI had already received more than 200,000 tips from the public about the riot, in addition to news footage and police officer testimony.

“There is absolute resolve from the Department of Justice to hold all who intentionally engaged in criminal acts at the Capitol accountable,” Justice Department spokesman Marc Raimondi said in an email. “We have consistently made clear that we will follow the facts and evidence and charge individuals accordingly. We remain confident that the U.S. District Court for Washington, DC can appropriately handle the docket related to any resulting charges.”

AD

The primary objective for authorities is to determine which individuals, if any, planned, orchestrated or directed the violence. To that end, the FBI has already found worrying linkages within such extremist groups as the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and Three Percenters, and is looking to see if those groups coordinated with each other to storm the building, according to people familiar with the investigation.

Prosecutors have signaled they are looking to bring charges of seditious conspiracy against anyone who planned and carried out violence aimed at the government — a charge that carries a maximum possible prison sentence of 20 years.

Evidence builds against self-styled militia members

But even as Justice Department officials look to bring those types of cases, they privately acknowledge those more determined and dangerous individuals may have operated within a broader sea of people who rushed through the doors but didn’t do much else, and prosecutors will ultimately have to decide if all of those lesser offenders should be charged.

AD

Officials insisted they are not under pressure in regards to timing of decisions about how to handle those type of cases. For one thing, investigators are still gathering evidence, and agents could easily turn up additional photos or online postings that show a person they initially believed was harmless had, in fact, encouraged or engaged in other crimes.

Investigators also expect that some of those charged in the riot will eventually cooperate and provide evidence against others, and that could change their understanding of what certain people said or did that day, these people said.

Nevertheless, these people said, some in federal law enforcement are concerned that charging people solely with unlawful entry, when they are not known to have committed any other bad acts, could lead to losses if they go to trial.

AD

“If an old man says all he did was walk in and no one tried to stop him, and he walked out and no one tried to stop him, and that’s all we know about what he did, that’s a case we may not win,” one official said.

Another official noted most of those arrested so far have no criminal records.

Meanwhile, defense lawyers for some of those charged are contemplating something akin to a “Trump defense” — that the president or other authority figures gave them permission or invited them to commit an otherwise illegal act.

“If you think of yourself as a soldier doing the bidding of the commander in chief, you don’t try to hide your actions. You assume you will be held up as a hero by the nation,” criminal defense lawyers Teri Kanefield and Mark Reichel wrote last week.

Such a defense might not forestall charges but could be effective at trial or sentencing. Trump’s looming impeachment trial in the Senate will also focus further attention on his actions and raise questions about the culpability of followers for the misinformation spread by leaders around bogus election-fraud claims rejected by courts and state voting officials.

AD

“It’s not a like a bunch of people gathered on their own and decided to do this, it’s not like a mob. It’s people who were asked to come by the president, encouraged to come by the president, and encouraged to do what they did by the president and a number of others,” said one attorney representing defendants charged in the breach who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss legal strategy.

Prosecutors have other options. For rioters with no previous criminal records or convictions and whose known behavior inside the Capitol was not violent or destructive, the government could enter into deferred plea agreements, a diversion program akin to pretrial probation in which prosecutors agree to drop charges if a defendant commits no offenses over a certain time period.

Such a resolution would not result in even a misdemeanor conviction, and has been used before in some cases involving individuals with a history of mental illness who were arrested for jumping the White House fence. Criminal defense attorneys note there may be further distinctions between individuals who may have witnessed illegal activity or otherwise had reason to know they were entering a restricted area, and those for whom prosecutors can’t show such awareness.

AD

There is also a question over whether charging all of the rioters could swamp the federal court system. In 2019, D.C. federal courts recorded only about 430 criminal cases, and fewer than 300 last year, when the legal system slowed significantly due to the pandemic. Many of those cases, however, had multiple defendants.

The workload of prosecuting the rioters could be eased if some of the cases were farmed out to other U.S. attorney offices around the country, but so far D.C. prosecutors have shown no interest in doing so. The law generally requires that individuals be prosecuted in the district in which a crime occurred.

“The crime happened here. Prosecutors and judges can see the crime scene from their office windows. I find it strange anyone would suggest it be done anywhere else,” a person familiar with the investigation said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss an internal debate.

Beyond all the evidence-gathering and charging decisions left to do, federal officials concede there will likely be some number of people who were there that day and are simply never identified, due to some combination of luck, masks or lack of social media posts.

Wow only 700-900 people invaded the capitol building?

LOL

that's actually a lot more inside than I thought it was. crazy. 

OnWis97

OnWis97 said:

AOC says she was hiding in her bathroom while people were trying to get into her office. 

https://fortune.com/2021/02/02/aoc-ig-live-video-capitol-trauma-bathroom/

I don't think we truly appreciate how close we came to seeing a big name killed.* It's not hyperbolic to say that her life was in jeopardy nor that someone like Pelosi or Pence could have been killed if seconds/minutes had been lost.  But hey, let's move on!

*And of course there's a lot of ignoring of those that did die, including the cop beaten to death on the scene. But realistically if a lawmaker had been killed the GOP would not be able to do this "time to move on" shtick.

So it turns out the whole thing was a lie. LOL. She wasn't even in the building.  #AlexandriaOcasioSmollett

HughFreakingDillon

OnWis97 said:

OnWis97 said:

AOC says she was hiding in her bathroom while people were trying to get into her office. 

https://fortune.com/2021/02/02/aoc-ig-live-video-capitol-trauma-bathroom/

I don't think we truly appreciate how close we came to seeing a big name killed.* It's not hyperbolic to say that her life was in jeopardy nor that someone like Pelosi or Pence could have been killed if seconds/minutes had been lost.  But hey, let's move on!

*And of course there's a lot of ignoring of those that did die, including the cop beaten to death on the scene. But realistically if a lawmaker had been killed the GOP would not be able to do this "time to move on" shtick.

So it turns out the whole thing was a lie. LOL. She wasn't even in the building.  #AlexandriaOcasioSmollett

what?

OnWis97

HughFreakingDillon said:

OnWis97 said:

OnWis97 said:

AOC says she was hiding in her bathroom while people were trying to get into her office. 

https://fortune.com/2021/02/02/aoc-ig-live-video-capitol-trauma-bathroom/

I don't think we truly appreciate how close we came to seeing a big name killed.* It's not hyperbolic to say that her life was in jeopardy nor that someone like Pelosi or Pence could have been killed if seconds/minutes had been lost.  But hey, let's move on!

*And of course there's a lot of ignoring of those that did die, including the cop beaten to death on the scene. But realistically if a lawmaker had been killed the GOP would not be able to do this "time to move on" shtick.

So it turns out the whole thing was a lie. LOL. She wasn't even in the building.  #AlexandriaOcasioSmollett

what?

There are mixed feelings on what it means. She was in Katie Porter's office in another building.  The "banging" on the door was a cop trying to move them to a secure location.  I guess you could argue that it's easy for us from the cheap seats to suggest she shouldn't have been freightened, but I'm starting to wonder whether she did go for the opportunist angle here.

mrussel1

OnWis97 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

OnWis97 said:

OnWis97 said:

AOC says she was hiding in her bathroom while people were trying to get into her office. 

https://fortune.com/2021/02/02/aoc-ig-live-video-capitol-trauma-bathroom/

I don't think we truly appreciate how close we came to seeing a big name killed.* It's not hyperbolic to say that her life was in jeopardy nor that someone like Pelosi or Pence could have been killed if seconds/minutes had been lost.  But hey, let's move on!

*And of course there's a lot of ignoring of those that did die, including the cop beaten to death on the scene. But realistically if a lawmaker had been killed the GOP would not be able to do this "time to move on" shtick.

So it turns out the whole thing was a lie. LOL. She wasn't even in the building.  #AlexandriaOcasioSmollett

what?

There are mixed feelings on what it means. She was in Katie Porter's office in another building.  The "banging" on the door was a cop trying to move them to a secure location.  I guess you could argue that it's easy for us from the cheap seats to suggest she shouldn't have been freightened, but I'm starting to wonder whether she did go for the opportunist angle here.

I think she has a habit of framing everything that happens into a particular ideological viewpoint.  So it would not surprise.  However, being the Capitol complex would qualify as to being 'there' to me.  Are we splitting hairs?  If she was at Reagan National, that would be different. 

cincybearcat

OnWis97 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

OnWis97 said:

OnWis97 said:

AOC says she was hiding in her bathroom while people were trying to get into her office. 

https://fortune.com/2021/02/02/aoc-ig-live-video-capitol-trauma-bathroom/

I don't think we truly appreciate how close we came to seeing a big name killed.* It's not hyperbolic to say that her life was in jeopardy nor that someone like Pelosi or Pence could have been killed if seconds/minutes had been lost.  But hey, let's move on!

*And of course there's a lot of ignoring of those that did die, including the cop beaten to death on the scene. But realistically if a lawmaker had been killed the GOP would not be able to do this "time to move on" shtick.

So it turns out the whole thing was a lie. LOL. She wasn't even in the building.  #AlexandriaOcasioSmollett

what?

There are mixed feelings on what it means. She was in Katie Porter's office in another building.  The "banging" on the door was a cop trying to move them to a secure location.  I guess you could argue that it's easy for us from the cheap seats to suggest she shouldn't have been freightened, but I'm starting to wonder whether she did go for the opportunist angle here.

She wasn’t in the Capitol? 

hedonist

Glass half-full thought of the week: Most people now know the spelling difference between capitol and capital.

I crack myself up sometimes. 

tbergs

HughFreakingDillon said:

tbergs said:

The Juggler said:

Seems like a lot of radicalized people to me

Around 200 or so. That's Trump math there. "A lot of people are saying...", "Everyone knows...", "The biggest..." Until large numbers equal bad, then it's just a few out of the masses. Everyone past the barricades "stormed" the capitol. Not all made it in, but the whole thing was treasonous.

tempo never said the picture above was 200. he actually said something in the thousands were outside the capitol, but was asking about how many were INSIDE. does everyone understand the word INSIDE?? and asking how many were inside is not "minimizing". 

some people just like facts. 

kinda hard having a factual discussion without,...you know.....FACTS. 

That's all fine and dandy, but I'm a bit skeptical of anyone at this point who openly wonders about how that many people got in the capitol or what happened. It's almost been a month. All the shit is out there. If you're wondering, do a bit of research. There's tons of video of the whole crazy mess from multiple angles and entries. Sorry, I get annoyed when it seems that ignorance is being employed to downplay what happened.

Also, I think I was mostly snapping at the dumb sarcasm from another poster calling it mostly peaceful after this was brought up. The whole thing was a cult rally based on conspiracy theories and lies and thousands took it to the next level with hundreds more turning it violent. People just stood around and videoed officers being beaten and attacked and then followed the most violent once barriers (human and physical) were out of the way. I'll estimate that half of these crazies would be just fine pulling the trigger on anyone walking on their property and be ready to stand their ground. Fuck all of these people.