Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    The Garden State
    Posts
    9,803

    Default oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

    This is their new defence strategy now that several of them are facing trial for Jan 6

    "If you think you are too small to make a difference, try sleeping with a mosquito"

    -Dalai Lama

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    70,230

    Default Re: oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

    So they thought they'd get an 'official Elephant Stamp' to legalise their activities?
    Hmmm, probably a justified belief given donald's rhetoric……………..

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    16,174

    Default oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

    I hate to tell them this, but

    1. They're not a militia under the militia act, and

    2. There was no insurrection or rebellion to suppress (save their own)

    And

    3. If they demonstrate in court that there was a "meeting of minds" betwixt TFG and them, an understanding, regarding an illegal goal - the prevention, by force, of the counting of the electoral ballots on January 6,

    Then they are providing evidence of their own, and TFG's, guilt of seditious conspiracy.

    [The last element needed to convict on seditious conspiracy is that at least one party to the conspiracy must have taken an overt act to further the illegal goal, something which is, so to say, not in dispute.]

    Perhaps the Oath Keepers' defense team came recommended by TFG?

    Because those lawyers don't seem to have thought things through too well.
    You would not enjoy Nietzsche, sir. He is fundamentally unsound. — P.G. Wodehouse (Carry On, Jeeves)

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    West Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    9,950

    Default Re: oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

    Not that I would check*, but I sorta wonder if he's still messaging them about it. He's prolly still sucking donations from them.


    *My Wife thinks I'm silly (gee what a surprise) but I am consistent, at least as consistent as that evil stupidity monger) but I refuse to hear his voice. When we're watching the TV for the evening news and some story that concerns him comes on, I whip my hearing aids out of my ears, hopefully in time, to get my fingertips plugged firmly in, so I don't have to hear his voice. I absolutely refuse to listen, even if I hear or read from the commentator what he is reported to have said or tweeted. I am positive that I know whatever his statement was, it was bs and probably both wrong and evil and self-serving and totally unenlightening. I've actually gotten to the point that I also won't listen to the R pols when they speak. If mcconnell or mccarthy or desantis is featured, it's the same self-serving and totally wrong and un-American claptrap that their evilputz would mouth, and I don't need to be insulted by it to understand and have my own position firmly in opposition. I will never, not fcking ever, entertain the notion that they might actually be right on something or that it would benefit me personall to 'know the enemy,' as it were. They can all rot quietly in whatever noxious hell they find themselves in. I absolutely will tune in and listen whenever the DoJ gets around to it's indictments and the appropriate court get around to announcing the appropriate verdict and sentencing.
    Speak softly and carry a mouthful of marbles.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    The Garden State
    Posts
    9,803

    Default Re: oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

    I agree with you Jim. I could not stand that man's voice 20 years ago. It has not aged well.
    "If you think you are too small to make a difference, try sleeping with a mosquito"

    -Dalai Lama

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    N. Fal on Cape Cod
    Posts
    18,145

    Default Re: oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

    Ever lived with someone who whines all the time? That's Trump.

    Self-centered, entitled, closed.
    A society predicated on the assumption that everyone in it should want to get rich is not well situated to become either ethical or imaginative.

    Photographer of sailing and sailboats
    And other things, too.
    http://www.landsedgephoto.com

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    2 states: NJ and confusion
    Posts
    43,239

    Default Re: oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

    My question is one of when people loyal to Trump realize it's a one way street.
    "alternative facts (lies)" are a cancer eating through a democracy, and will kill it. 1st amendment is not absolute.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Frankfort, MI
    Posts
    10,728

    Default Re: oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

    Quote Originally Posted by John Smith View Post
    My question is one of when people loyal to Trump realize it's a one way street.
    A lot of them don’t seem to be able to get away from his grasp even as they realize how badly they are being used. We’ve seen this play out over and over…

    Jeff C
    Don’t expect much, and you won’t be disappointed…

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    58,092

    Default Re: oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

    Quote Originally Posted by leikec View Post
    A lot of them don’t seem to be able to get away from his grasp even as they realize how badly they are being used. We’ve seen this play out over and over…

    Jeff C
    Typical cult member mentality.

    Some cult members have been known to top themselves.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    21,625

    Default Re: oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

    He’s making noises about starting his campaign soon, probably to take some attention off the j6 hearings. It’s scary to think he still has an audience.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Portland, Maine
    Posts
    22,868

    Default Re: oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

    The Oathkeepers are going to be Federalized alright. But by the DOJ - straight into Federal prison with the lot of them. 20 years for Seditious Conspiracy.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    2 states: NJ and confusion
    Posts
    43,239

    Default Re: oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

    Quote Originally Posted by McMike View Post
    Think about the what if. What if T***p gets reelected, or one of his proxies? They're all pardoned.
    Maybe. Maybe not. Red states have women who like the right to an abortion should they want one. We don't know if people getting locked up behind the attack on the Capital will cost or gain GOP votes.

    We don't know who the DOJ is apt to put on trial before this election, let alone '24.

    A lot of s**t can hit the fan before people vote in November.
    "alternative facts (lies)" are a cancer eating through a democracy, and will kill it. 1st amendment is not absolute.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    St. Simon\'s Island, GA, USA
    Posts
    6,058

    Default Re: oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

    Barbara Tuchman (sp) may need to write a new chapter for the "March of Folly".

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    28,624

    Default Re: oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

    They need uniforms. Then we could call them the Brownshorts.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Wrocław, Poland
    Posts
    12,813

    Default Re: oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

    A lot of s**t can hit the fan before people vote in November.
    Quote Originally Posted by McMike View Post
    I'm not sure what you mean by this, but generally, sh17 hitting the fan is good for no one.
    He means, a lot can happen with the Jan 6 hearings (indictments, arrests, charges, etc.) that would drive people away from voting for Republicans in November--so, that kind of fan action would be bad for Republicans, and good for everyone else. I'm all for it, though I'm skeptical.

    Tom
    Ponoszenie konsekwencji!

    www.tompamperin.com

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 1999
    Location
    Hyannis, MA, USA
    Posts
    50,826

    Default Re: oathkeepers thought trump would "federalize" them

    "Barbara Tuchman (sp) may need to write a new chapter for the 'March of Folly'." [15]

    Doesn't fit what she meant by folly and she's not available on this plane of existence anyway.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •