Beer Belly Putsch AFTERMATH Thread

Please, this may very well be the case. I actually think he is fucked up in the head. However, that should mean he is required to be supervised by someone for the rest of his life. They should be able to look into his life and activities and advise and restrict him from harming himself and others. Perhaps he should be medicated as needed. I have got no problem with saying a bunch of these people are in need of assistance in living and fell prey to manipulators and bad actors. If you are going to claim the too stupid to know better condition, then you need to submit to supervision by medical professionals for the rest of your life. That includes looking over your money and activities too.

Going to be entertaining to see the people who have been screaming about "respecting the blue" for the last few years write off and disrespect these cops because they've become inconvenient

Tucker Carlson is a few days ahead of you, but he's being smart about it, see?

They aren't "proper" cops:



Julie Kelly just pointed out - as if it fucking means anything - that Officer Fanone "has a lot of tattoos" i.e. he's more of a gang member than a cop. None of Fanone's tats would be visible when in uniform, btw.

Man, Tucker is just on his hypocritical, insufferable douchebag A game, best in the business

They were lucky.

It generally doesn't go well when 'persons of interest' hang out in front of the DOJ.

That's a huge change in DOJ policy, but unfortunately likely one that's going to be litigated, and probably lost, if Ken White's take on All the Presidents' Lawyers about the Westfall Act is accurate.

The Westfall Act only protects against lawsuits concerning the course of their legitimate government duties. That's why Brooks isn't being protected, for example - there's nothing about his legitimate duties in riling up a crowd and sending them to the capitol.

Even simple electioneering is absolutely outside the realm of legitimate duties of the office, by statute.

Y'know what the real appalling act of lethal treason is?
Outrage culture.

Is that the case for elected officials though? DOJ certainly thought not for the E. Jean Carroll case.

DOJ's argument in the Carroll case is that POTUS is different. It hinged on both whether Trump was a government employee at the time of the statements that defamed her AND whether those statements were within the scope of his office. Campaign activity doesn't apply to Brooks as it is explicitly set out that he cannot campaign for a Presidential election as a member of Congress. But what a sitting POTUS has "scope" to comment on is far murkier. Trump routinely held forth opinions on ongoing legal cases - potentially influencing the judge, jury and witnesses. But he was never held to account on such. Obama made some stupid pre-emptive comments about cases too (the one where the cop arrested the Professor breaking into his own house, for example), though later backtracked.

The DOJ argument is that, because talking to reporters was part of Trump's "duties" as POTUS, expressing an opinion on Carroll counts. The court wasn't convinced but this got overturned later.

Well stated - that's what I read as well.

Personally I'm not for that interpretation, because it is specifically concerning statements about potentially criminal actions prior to the Presidency. It's even harder to justify it once the President in question has left office.

But I'm not a lawyer, so while it seems terribly unjust to me, I can't comment on whether or not it is legally accurate.

Might be a sign of similar "slap on the wrist" stuff for any Senators/CongressCritters who gave "tours" to the 1/6ers. Though C&L admits this was probably all the law would allow in his case.

https://crooksandliars.com/2021/07/former-oregon-state-rep-gets-slap-wrist

Hawley supposedly wore body armor to the Trump rally on 1/6.

Sadly not likely helped by the refusal of the GOP to acknowledge what happened and - in certain quarters - to outright paint them as conflict actors.

Nah, they'll be like @Paladin and @oldfella1962 and just vanish from the discussions when they realise they're defending the indefensible.

Fourth officer has now committed suicide.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/officer-kyle-defreytag_n_61089f3de4b038cedb36e4ae?ri18n=true

Now, I'm suspicious.

Is anyone else suspicious?

I mean, that's weird, isn't it? That 4 police officers in the same department committed suicide within 7 months?

If I'd suffered PTSD and possibly physical injuries and had a solid chunk of the nation outright denying it either happened or wasn't that bad, with death threats/internet abuse and FOX News calling me a crisis actor, I might consider ending it.

I don't buy it. I mean, yes, all that is bad and should definitely not be happening. But, being sad and being down is not the same thing as depression. I'm wondering if these 4 people ... I don't know ... were making waves for someone and are being taken out.

But, I tend to leap to the worst possible conclusion, so I had to ask the question if it was just me or if anyone else thought it was suspicious.

Suicide rates in people with PTSD are 4-7x higher than normal. Cops also have a higher than average suicide rate anyway.