ChiGoose
-
Posts
4,567 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ChiGoose
-
-
1 hour ago, BillsFanNC said:
Correct. I neglected to include the qualifier that no AMERICANS have ever been convicted of seditious conspiracy against their OWN government.
Big difference.
Now. For the fifth time. Why no insurrection charges for insurrectionists?
59 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:Maybe it's just me, but it doesn't seem like our friend chigoose is exchanging ideas in good faith here, does it?
Pretty obvious question, right?
Since there was an insurrection it follows logically that there should be insurrection charges, right?
It's not like they don't have hundreds of capitol trespassers to choose from to charge with insurrection, right?
I'm interested in his legal opinion as to why we have yet to see a single insurrection charge levied against insurrectionists?
Perplexing.
Americans being found guilty of seditious conspiracy can be found at: United States v. Lebron, 222 F.2d 531 (2d Cir. 1955).As to why we haven’t seen an insurrection charge, I’ve already answered that.
Unlike you, apparently, I have a life and cannot respond immediately to every idiotic question asked on this hellsite full of morons. I was cooking dinner and then enjoying it with my wife (I know it hurts to remind you that I’m taken and therefore will never be with you, but alas…) and then we watched some tv. I am very much enjoying Sandman. It’s not exactly to the book but it’s very good.
It took just a minute or so of research to provide the evidence of something you claim didn’t exist, but I eagerly anticipate your next attempt to move the goalposts.
-
57 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:
Goose…I’m neither an attorney or a doctor but aren’t the things you’re describing the sort of cases that are regularly adjudicated in medical courts of ethics? I’m certain all of these cases will work themselves out. Give it some time for the process to work. The Supreme Court decision, like every ruling in a major case, will have ramifications that lower courts and legislatures will work through.
When Roe was the law of the land, a woman whose pregnancy was determined to be not viable would generally be given the option of either waiting for it to resolve or having an abortion. Given the risks of waiting (sepsis, etc.), the best course of action is generally an abortion.
In the Dobbs world with the recent abortion laws, if the pregnancy is non-viable but doesn’t fit within a statutory exception (the fetus still has a heartbeat), the doctors cannot offer an abortion. If the woman isn’t sick enough that her life is in danger, she cannot get one. Most likely, she’ll be sent home to pass the fetus on her own or wait until she’s sick enough to get treatment.
What we see now in states with strict abortion laws is that even in the easy cases where the pregnancy is non-viable and doctors would normally perform an abortion, they are instead having to talk to lawyers or present the case before a committee. During this time, the woman’s health often deteriorates.
-
2 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:
Link?
U.S. v. Rahman, 189 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 1999)QuoteAppeal from the January 17, 1996, judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Michael B. Mukasey, District Judge) convicting ten appellants of various offenses, including seditious conspiracy, in connection with a plot to bomb the World Trade Center and bridges and tunnels in New York City.
Convictions affirmed; sentence of El-Gabrowny remanded for further consideration; sentences of all other Appellants affirmed.
-
26 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:
Given that the charge of seditious conspiracy has never been successfully prosecuted in the history of our nation....it's hard to say.
It should surprise nobody that this is false. -
26 minutes ago, B-Man said:
Good Lord.
I can't believe that you expect anyone to believe that lie.
That situation is (thankfully) very rare and is due mostly to poor physicians, not any laws.
I worked for over thirty years in local hospitals, including a Catholic one.
NO ONE who ever showed up with a non-viable baby was ever turned away, much less not treated.
Shame on you for lying down in the mud with B.S. and Tibs.
https://apnews.com/article/abortion-science-health-medication-lupus-e4042947e4cc0c45e38837d394199033“
Munoz said he faced an awful predicament with a recent patient who had started to miscarry and developed a dangerous womb infection. The fetus still had signs of a heartbeat, so an immediate abortion — the usual standard of care — would have been illegal under Texas law.
“We physically watched her get sicker and sicker and sicker” until the fetal heartbeat stopped the next day, “and then we could intervene,” he said. The patient developed complications, required surgery, lost multiple liters of blood and had to be put on a breathing machine “all because we were essentially 24 hours behind.’’
In a study published this month in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, doctors at two Texas hospitals cited the cases of 28 women less than 23 weeks pregnant who were treated for dangerous pregnancies. The doctors noted that all of the women had recommended abortions delayed by nine days because fetal heart activity was detected. Of those, nearly 60% developed severe complications — nearly double the number of complications experienced by patients in other states who had immediate therapeutic abortions. Of eight live births among the Texas cases, seven died within hours. The eighth, born at 24 weeks, had severe complications including brain bleeding, a heart defect, lung disease and intestinal and liver problems.”
-
5 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:
Why hasn't a single person been charged with insurrection during an insurrection?
Because Seditious Conspiracy is a slam dunk case and DoJ attorneys are generally small-c conservatives. They don’t want to risk losing.
Do you think the charged Oath Keepers are guilty of seditious conspiracy?
-
3 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:
And that, in your view, adds up to overthrowing the US government? Hindering and delaying the counting of the electors = attempting to overthrow the government? Why aren't we looking at the first item under bullet 3? Keep in mind the Oath Keepers were infiltrated with FBI informants. Shocker! How come that always seems to be the case with these groups and the "threat to democracy" that they pose? FBI informants embedded in these groups who could have stopped the threat before anything happened, but they never seem to be able to. I wonder why?
You know what maybe some of the Capitol Police...who actually let people into the Capitol, thereby helping cause the delay, should also be charged with seditious conspiracy? Absolutely 100% totally ridiculous.
Beyond that we have the word "insurrection" thrown around here an awful lot. Perhaps you can explain why not a single person has been charged with insurrection under the federal statute during what we've been repeatedly told was an insurrection?
That, in my view, adds up to seditious conspiracy. Attempting to prevent the certification of the election as part of a plan for the loser of an election to be declared the winner. The Feds just need to show that the facts match just one of those items. Item 6 is a slam dunk.
Are you saying the FBI should not infiltrate domestic terror organizations?
One capitol police office has been charged for assisting the Jan 6 rioters. But you're not guilty of conspiracy if you weren't part of the plan.
Are you asserting that these Oath Keepers are NOT guilty of Seditious Conspiracy?
-
1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:
Huh? Talk about a nitwit! The discussion is not about ‘having a baby’. It’s about killing a baby. Sheeessh what an idiot.
Or making a woman go septic with a nonviable pregnancy before she can get treatment. That's a nice bonus too!
-
1
-
-
I moved to Chicago and married a Bears fan, so I'll politely cheer for them when they're on if it doesn't impact the Bills. Though, the Bears are such a mess, she doesn't want to watch them anymore and prefers watching the Bills. We just picked up tickets for the Christmas Eve game and I'm not sure if she's going to be wearing Bills gear or Bears gear...
In the past, we've tried to go to Delilah's a couple times a season. It's one of the two Bills bars in the city and has more of a tailgate feel than the other one, Lincoln Station.
We haven't been yet this season, partly because the Bills have been on tv here a decent amount this season. But with a stretch of games in the early slate coming up, we'll probably pop in a couple times in the coming weeks.
Also, watching the Bears makes me feel very good about the Bills...
-
6 minutes ago, Doc said:
Oh wait, they met for dinner at an Olive Garden? Definitely insurrectionists. If it had been, say, an Applebees...
They made a good choice avoiding Applebees or they may have been charged with 2 for 20 instead of just one insurrection.
Plus, those unlimited breadsticks are great for carbo loading ahead of a day of beating up cops.
-
2 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:
And there’s your not-so-hidden agenda. It is important for you and your ilk to create alternative scenarios — even bizarre gay hooker pickup gone bad scenarios — to counteract the obvious fact that this guy was: (1) not all there mentally; AND (2) influenced by nutty QAnon conspiracy theories.
I repeat: the gay hooker narrative seemed to emerge from a report that the attacker was in his underwear when the cops arrived. That’s it. (And I don’t know if that has been confirmed or refuted.) in some alternative universe there could be facts like “Pelosi was seen leaving a SF bar with a man fitting the description of the attacker and taking an Uber with him to Pelosi’s home.” OK, in that case, some speculation about the nature of the attack would be warranted. But we have nothing like that. Nothing. It’s an ass-covering story now by fringey MAGA/Q types who don’t want to admit that their wacko politics has a special appeal to the mentally ill. Because, you know, it’s effin crazy.The thing that gets me about this sort of thing is that it stems from the fact that they cannot accept that anything that makes their side look bad is true. So even if there is a very simple explanation supported by the facts, they come up with the craziest BS to deflect and say it's actually liberals and nothing wrong ever came from the right.
-
6 minutes ago, nedboy7 said:
Chef you need to read more.
https://about.bgov.com/news/entitlement-spending-cap-plans-linked-by-gop-to-debt-limit-deal/
Unless you feel Bloomberg is fake news of course.
Anything they disagree with is fake news.
-
35 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:
Missed the point....again.
WTF does having an Italian feast at Olive Garden have to do with anything at all? Let alone worthy of a ridiculous CNN tweet. Maybe a bit of relevancy could be added to the tweet had CNN mentioned that these dangerous thugs who were trying to overthrow the government also left their weapons in their VA hotel room before leaving to do the "insurrection".
Think of how much of a lemming moron you have to be to believe that a rag tag bunch of misfits, who didn't bring their weapons, were going to overthrow the government of the most powerful nation ever known to mankind.
1. CNN is dumb and I will not defend it. We'd all be better off if it never existed
2. The probability of success is not a factor in seditious conspiracy: 18 U.S.C.§ 2384
I know that you lack the cognitive ability to actually comprehend anything that doesn't fit your predetermined worldview, but I beg anyone who is reading this to actually read the language of the statute I cited. It does not require a likelihood of success nor does it require "overthrowing the government" as the only objective or potential consequence of the actions.
For anyone who isn't used to reading legislative or legal language, I can break it down for you.
To have meet the requirements of guilt under 18 U.S.C. § 2384, you need to meet the following conditons:
- Two or more persons
- In any state, territory, or any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States
-
Conspire to any one of the below:
- Overthrow the Government of the US
- Put down the Government of the US
- destroy the Government of the US by force
- Levy war against the Government of the US
- Oppose by force the authority of the Government of the US
- Prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the US
- By force seize, take, or possess any property of the US contrary to the authority thereof
-
They shall be:
- Fined; and/or
- Imprisoned not more than 20 years
In the context of Jan 6, you're mostly looking at the 6th item under bullet 3: Prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the US. They were attempting to prevent, and successfully delayed, the execution of the certification of the vote.
We have two or more people in the US working together to prevent or delay the certification of the electoral vote. That falls squarely under seditious conspiracy.
-
Sure thing!
Here's the article from Politico with the embedded emails: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/02/trump-lawyers-saw-justice-thomas-as-only-chance-to-stop-2020-election-certification-00064592
Here's a screenshot of one of Eastman's emails:
He types with missing letters (presumably to evade searches), but here's the relevant part:
Quote"A though the Pres dent s gned a ver f cat on for that back on Dec. 1, he has s nce been made aware that some of the a egat ons (and ev dence proffered by the experts) has been naccurate. For h m to s gn a new ver f cat on w th that know edge (and ncorporat on by reference) wou d not be accurate. And I have no doubt that an aggress ve DA or US Atty somep ace w go after both the Pres dent and h s awyers once a the dust sett es on th s."
As noted by the article:
QuoteThe emails also shed new light on an effort to get Trump to sign documents connected to a Dec. 31, 2020, federal lawsuit challenging the election results in Georgia, including acute concerns Trump’s lawyers voiced during that chaotic period that Trump might put himself in legal jeopardy if he attested to the voter fraud data contained in it.
...
After some exchanges, including with Trump White House lawyer Eric Herschmann, the lawyers agreed they would remove some of the specific figures before Trump swore to the accuracy of the lawsuit.
But they also debated whether the federal complaint should “incorporate by reference” the voter fraud data included in an earlier state-level lawsuit. Eastman warned that since the state lawsuit was filed, evidence had disproved some of the voter fraud data contained in it — and having Trump point to the earlier data would be erroneous.
“I know it is late in the day, but do we need to incorporate that complaint by reference?” Eastman wondered.
...
Court records show Trump’s signature was ultimately attested to by William McCathran, an assistant executive clerk working for the White House.
Trump’s signature was key to U.S. District Court Judge David Carter’s Oct. 19 ruling that the emails must be disclosed to the House Jan. 6 committee. Carter said Trump signed the verification to a federal court complaint under penalty of perjury despite evidence that he’d been told many of the fraud claims in the lawsuit were inaccurate.
So in summary, Trump's attorneys knew that some of the evidence in their lawsuit was false but he attested to it anyway. That is a crime. It's why we have these emails: there is no attorney-client privilege to commit crimes and upon reviewing these emails, a judge determined that it was more likely than not that these emails were part of a crime and therefore not covered by privilege.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, BillsFanNC said:
"The people trying to overthrow the government are idiots and therefore can't have been trying to overthrow the government" is certainly a take.
-
3 minutes ago, Wacka said:
Why is that gross? Not wishing that anybody do that but it is just a warning to be careful. With the way lefty loonies are getting more and more off the rails i wonder how nuts they will be on Wednesday after they lose the House and Senate.
Let me know when you find a story on Wednesday about a Democrat jumping out of a building due to the election results. Or should I just file this under the "rainbow fentanyl in your kids' candy" fake crap that people make up to make themselves feel superior?
-
8 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:
The CDC does monitor flu with a surveillance program that you linked to. They regionally monitor for hot spots in flu activity and to pick up new variants. Just like they do with covid. Even this surveillance data lags by a week. His point was that we had "live" covid death trackers on major networks that gave people the impression that they were counting deaths in real time. Impossible.
If your argument is that the media sucks at its job, you'll find no argument from me.
-
2 minutes ago, OrangeBills said:
The metrics are all lies, that's the problem.
I don't know ANYONE who died from COVID, but I do know three elderly people who passed away who were categorized as COVID deaths but were not.
One was 79 years old, Dementia & Parkinsons, constantly wandering around and had stopped feeding himself or taking care of himself, died of natural causes
Another, and this is unbelievable, the family didn't want their 87 year old father to have to go through a second diabetic-induced leg amputation so they let him go, removed feeding tube and everything...but he died of COVID
The bottom line is certain Americans WANTED COVID to be a thing so badly they created a "Covid-tracker"...we have never been able to track disease, flu, even deaths in this country but they had COVID data in real-time. It's a joke. And a Lie
So this is all nonsense. COVID is real, it killed over a million Americans. It wasn't made up. People didn't WANT COVID to be a thing. That's so unbelievably stupid. Why would anyone want a pandemic?
Different people had different ideas on how to handle the pandemic. But COVID is real.
If you think that the coding of COVID deaths was done poorly, then look at excess deaths. That is, the number of people who died over what would be expected during that time period, from any and all causes. The numbers are pretty staggering: https://ourworldindata.org/excess-mortality-covid
Also, here's your flu tracker: https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/usmap.htm
-
4 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:
Nothing here such as discussing "various legal strategies" equates to criminal activity. All it does is frame the thought process of the legal team and generally you employ lawyers to interpret and navigate the legal process, not circumvent or break it. All a big nothing.
Having someone sign a sworn document they know is false actually is a crime.
-
Just now, Wacka said:
On Wednesday, do not go walking next to high buildings or at the base of cliffs. Watch out for falling Denocrats.
That's pretty gross.
-
Just now, Bandito said:
You are. You are a Democrat. They don't have functional brains.
You're telling on yourself.
-
Just now, Bandito said:
You are a Democrat. That shows your lack any critical thinking. You must be so scared. Put your mask back on! It is only going to get worse for you moving forward. Enjoy taking many Ls
Oh no! I'm so owned! You have completely owned me with this devastating comeback! I haven't heard an attack this devastating since the third grade!
Honestly, the idea that everybody who votes for the party I disagree with is both dumb and dangerous. In your case though, it's clearly more about being dumb.
-
2 minutes ago, Bandito said:
DemoKKKrats grasping at straws as the midterm Red Tsunami looms. Your tears will be awesome on 11/8
You should lay off the crack buddy, it's addling your brains.
Two things can be true:
- Trump committed crimes
- The GOP is probably going to take Congress next week
They are not mutually exclusive. That people are still parroting this idiotic talking point makes me concerned about the quality of education in this country. Lots of people seem to lack critical thinking skills.
-
Politico has obtained John Eastman's Crime-Fraud Emails
Oh look, a crime:
Eastman is stating that Trump knows that the information on documents for an election lawsuit in Georgia is false but he ends up signing them anyway.
He's also dropping random letters, presumably to prevent the email from being found through searching by word.
These emails were deemed by a judge to more likely than not be part of a crime and therefore exempt from attorney-client privilege.
January 6th 2021 FEDSURRECTION: The Corrupt Biden Regime: White House, FBI, DOJ, media, committee
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
Yes, obviously.