Turns out, waving the flag inside the Capitol isn't a crime
41 Don Surber
 They hanged John Brown for his insurrection of December 2, 1859.
The fake one at the Capitol won't result in much punishment, much to the dismay of the press.
Politico was despondent. It reported, "Americans outraged by the storming of Capitol Hill are in for a jarring reality check: Many of those who invaded the halls of Congress on Jan. 6 are likely to get little or no jail time.
"While public and media attention in recent weeks has been focused on high-profile conspiracy cases against right-wing, paramilitary groups like the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys, the most urgent decisions for prosecutors involve resolving scores of lower-level cases that have clogged D.C.’s federal district court."
Yes, how awful it is to have actual crimes by actual criminals clog up the courts. The federal courts should clear their dockets to allow the judges to punish any and all political dissidents.
34 years ago the Supreme Court ruled that burning the flag is not a crime.
The people who defended that decision now contend that waving a flag is.
To be fair, the story did say, "Although prosecutors have loaded up their charging documents with language about the existential threat of the insurrection to the republic, the actions of many of the individual rioters often boiled down to trespassing. And judges have wrestled with how aggressively to lump those cases in with those of the more sinister suspects."
Prosecutorial rhetoric is not the same as a conviction. Some in the press do not understand the difference between words and action.
The problem is there was no insurrection. Yes, 5 people died. 4 were protesters, including an unarmed Ashli Babbitt whom a Capitol Police officer shot and killed. The officer was never publicly named.
Politico also said -- without evidence -- "The resolution of the more mundane cases also presents acute questions about equity, since most of the Capitol riot defendants are white, while misdemeanor charges are often a vexing problem for minority defendants in other cases."
I don't recall 230 mostly black people being arrested an charged in this summer's riots that destrpoyed parts of city after city.
The real problem is the First Amendment protection of the right to protest.
Politico wrote, "While violent assaults in the Capitol are rare, protests and acts of civil disobedience — such as disrupting congressional hearings or even House and Senate floor sessions, are more common. That means prosecutors and judges will have to weigh how much more punishment a Trump supporter who invaded the Capitol during the Electoral College count deserves than, say, an anti-war protester chanting at a CIA confirmation hearing or a gun-control advocate shouting in the middle of the State of the Union address.
"Judges are also attempting to reckon with separating the individual actions of rioters from the collective threat of the mob, which they have noted helped inspire and provide cover for violent assaults, property destruction and increased the overall terror and danger of the assorted crimes committed."
While one police officer died, perhaps after an attack, the violence was not widespread.
The collective threat of the mob, as Politico said, was an overreaction by congressmen and congressional staffers, people who have no problem bombing the hell out of countries on the other side of the world, but believe being scared (and they were) is a crime that deserves imprisonment.
The Washington Establishment cranked up the rhetoric and made this mass trespassing to be an insurrection, just months after dismissing a billion dollars or more in damage to businesses as mostly peaceful protests.
But this disinformation campaign won't convince judges to send to prison people who protested the acceptance of an election they believe was stolen.
I think we can all condemn their actions without condoning prosecution if only because paybacks are a female dog. |
