There’s also a book about the making of the movie, which explains some of what went wrong.
The Devil’s Candy? Or was it a different one?
Yep.
Moderating:
Ok. Enough hijacking about the origination of the “ham sandwich” comment and all the discussion that followed. Head over to Cafe Society for those discussions, please.
Clarification, please. Are we allowed to discuss what “mustard-stained napkin” even means? Because, joking apart, I’d actually like to know.
Speak about it all you wish in another forum and another thread. You can even link back to the thread that inspired your curiosity.
Thank you.
Heh, the Qanon Shaman is actually trying to withdraw his guilty plea, which would expose him to another trial.
Yeah, and people who have tried to fight their 1/6 charges had done so much better in terms of prison time, huh?
I didn’t know you could withdraw a guilty plea once you’ve been sentenced let alone once you’ve served that sentence. I think the QAnon Shaman made his choice and he’s just going to have to live with it. No regerts, my friend.
Well, as the article says, it’s really rare. It normally would be due to something such as inadequate legal counsel if it happened at all. However, this fool seems to be a determined fool. It seems especially stupid considering he has already served his sentence, and could be sentenced to further time if he is exposed to a new trial.
i was going to post that. things are really moving now.
After a magistrate in Ingham County, Mich., signed off on the charges Tuesday, Nessel released a video explaining her action. The 16 defendants and/or their attorneys were then notified and defendants given a week to turn themselves in or face arrest.
She had previously attempted to refer the Michigan electors’ case to the Justice Department, but in the absence of federal action, she proceeded on her own. Nessel did not coordinate with either Smith or other state attorneys general before filing her case. Her closely guarded move might have taken Smith by surprise.
it appears that ms nessel is keeping the charges just to the electors and michigan. she is not going for rico just keeping it at specific counts that are regularly prosecuted in state law.
as to where it should go…
these charges do go to the issues of jan 6th… although they could be a different thread as it was more election interference than attacking congress.
I tend to err to the side of conflating the 6th with the entire “alternate slate of electors” scheme.
Trump supporters – writ large – seem to be either:
- in powerful denial about the electors piece or
- are genuinely unaware of its existence and how the 1/6 actions were hoped to be “nothing more than” the scheme’s denouement.
But I’d defer to the moderators if they feel strongly one way or the other.
i agree, as the “alternate slate” was to be used during the jan 6th meeting of congress. wisconsin tried to get them into pence’s hands that day. all connected.
It’s all the same, though. Attacking Congress was election interference, since they were attacking it specifically to stop the certification of the electoral votes. Ther was even a guy who was trying to interfere with the election on the day of the election, and then later participated in the riot:
Exactly, they were all the same effort, explicitly so.
From that article:
Edward Lang, who was arrested and charged for his role in the riot after he posted photos and videos on social media placing him at the Capitol that day, filed a petition with the Court on Friday. He is asking the justices to hear his appeal of one of the 11 charges he was indicted on: obstruction of an official proceeding.
Boy, if those fuckers take up that challenge, they will have sunk to a new low (hard as that might be to imagine!). Fuckers won’t allow cameras into their chambers, but are fine with rioters crashing into Congress…
There article leaves a lot of questions. What’s the procedural device to “petition” the Supreme Court to take a case before it even goes through normal appeals? What would the government have to prove if “corrupt” was an element of the crime?
The statute that Lang’s legal team is arguing has been too broadly applied in his case comes from a federal law that states an individual who “corruptly alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document” or “otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so” can be imprisoned for up to 20 years.
And then there’s this from crazytown:
It went on: “Our political life for centuries has been fractious, with violence all too frequent. Seeking to punish and silence dissent in the name of democracy is the twisted dream of a slumbering tyrant.”
So, the insurrection was just “dissent.”
“No! You’re the tyrant!”