Re: Oath Keepers leader and 10 others charged with ‘seditious conspiracy’ related to US Capitol attack
Posted by:
The FXU Conspirator
()
Date: January 15, 2022 09:13AM
Almost nobody is ever charged with Sedition, and those tiny few in history who have been, usually are acquitted. This is because successfully prosecuting that charge is extremely difficult.
What these 11 hillbillys did may or may not have been Sedition. I don't know.
AFAIK they:
(a) sent or received some encrypted text messages about their plans or ideas - the feds probably got this by one of the recipients turning it over.
(b) some (like 6?) of them went un-armed to the 1/6 rally and, operating in militry formation style, broke some door locks or glass or something.
(c) the other (5?) of them remained behind in a hotel in Arlington, where they were in posession of guns, in case reinforcements were needed or something like that.
The main idea is that these 11 people conspired to overthrow the Government.
We will see what the details are, and it will be interesting to watch. They might be guilty of something, and it will be interesting to see what.
But is it very important to focus on 11 unarmed hillbillys who thought they could somehow forcibly take over the country or something?
It's interesting, from a "Oh, look, crazy people!" angle. But what is the real reason for this prosecution?
It gets the words "SEDITION" and "CONSPIRACY" attached to the 1/6 investigation.
The purpose and gola of the investigation is to somehow legally disquality Donald Trump from running for office again.
Aside from these guys, there isn't really any evidence of conspiracy to stage a coup or anything.
It is necessary to find *some* actual conspiracy somewhere. Otherwise, the Democrats look stupid. If we can get the word "Trump" into headlines next to these guys, that makes it seem like Trump did it. If you're an idiot.
Anyway, it's all about the theatre, and will therefore be "interesting" in a way.
The legal technicalities and theory and politics of Sedition charges will be rehashed. That will be in some very abstract way, interestig to Constitutional law scholars.