Lawyer up, guys.
-
They did not spray paint the car. That would be vandalism. They threw an explosive, incendiary bomb into it. If the gas tank blew it could have been a much larger, more dangerous explosion.
-
They did not spray paint the car. That would be vandalism. They threw an explosive, incendiary bomb into it. If the gas tank blew it could have been a much larger, more dangerous explosion.
@Mik said in Lawyer up, guys.:
They did not spray paint the car. That would be vandalism. They threw an explosive, incendiary bomb into it. If the gas tank blew it could have been a much larger, more dangerous explosion.
Good point. Upgrade "vandalism" to "arson."
-
@jon-nyc said in Lawyer up, guys.:
Car was not occupied which will make a big difference at sentencing.
It’s too bad people have to have their own lives blown up so others think about it. Their careers are toast so the sentencing is just gilding the lily.
Oh and after all the schooling thinking it’s okay to blow up a police car, if that is a lapse in judgement...then everyone gets a pass. Even white supremists.
-
@Mik said in Lawyer up, guys.:
They did not spray paint the car. That would be vandalism. They threw an explosive, incendiary bomb into it. If the gas tank blew it could have been a much larger, more dangerous explosion.
Good point. Upgrade "vandalism" to "arson."
@Axtremus said in Lawyer up, guys.:
@Mik said in Lawyer up, guys.:
They did not spray paint the car. That would be vandalism. They threw an explosive, incendiary bomb into it. If the gas tank blew it could have been a much larger, more dangerous explosion.
Good point. Upgrade "vandalism" to "arson."
Try terrorism.
-
Someone goes to St. Andrews, Princeton, NYU gets hired by top law firm starting at 150k and decided one night to make Molotov cocktails to throw at something, anything and eventually a cop car. The narrative on him is his not privileged life and one indiscretion.
This is WOKE. You can’t make this shit up.
-
@jon-nyc said in Lawyer up, guys.:
Car was not occupied which will make a big difference at sentencing.
It’s too bad people have to have their own lives blown up so others think about it. Their careers are toast so the sentencing is just gilding the lily.
Oh and after all the schooling thinking it’s okay to blow up a police car, if that is a lapse in judgement...then everyone gets a pass. Even white supremists.
-
New York Attorneys Accused of Firebombing Police Car Given Generous Plea Deal
hey were facing domestic terrorism charges and the possibility of 30 years in jail. This week, the Biden Administration agreed to a massive reduction of the charges in a plea agreement that will likely result only in a couple years of jail time. What is particularly bizarre is that the plea agreement reduces an earlier plea agreement for a more serious offense.
The plea deal by the Justice Department is a breathtaking reduction in the charges and expected sentencing of the two lawyers.
Earlier, some of us were surprised that U.S. District Judge Margo Brodie upheld the $250,000 bail determination of U.S. Magistrate Judge Steven Gold. Prosecutors presented evidence that they two attorneys were trying to distribute Molotov cocktails and suggested that Mattis did not appear rational. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed Judge Brodie and the two attorneys were sent back to jail. (Rahman’s bail was paid for by friend and fellow attorney Salmah Rizvi, who served in the Defense Department and State Department during the Obama administration).
Notably, Rahman and Mattis pleaded guilty last year to one count of possessing and making an explosive device, which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison. Now, however, they will be allowed to withdraw the earlier plea and instead pleaded guilty to conspiring to assemble the Molotov cocktail and damage the New York Police Department patrol car. That is a nosebleed of a drop in the severity and punishment for this violent attack.
-
Turley continues:
"It is a sharp contrast to the harsh position taken by the Biden Justice Department on many of those accused of rioting on January 6th. AG Garland cited the threat to police officers in pledging an unprecedented effort to charge those involved "on any level" in the riot..."
Yet, the Biden Administration walked back the charges, unraveled the earlier plea to a lesser offense, and told that court that the earlier charges would have resulted in “excessive sentencing” for the attorneys. Instead, they are supporting a maximum sentence of five years with a recommendation of between 18 to 24 months imprisonment...
They will now be given sentences closer to tax fraud than terrorism.
-
Turley continues:
"It is a sharp contrast to the harsh position taken by the Biden Justice Department on many of those accused of rioting on January 6th. AG Garland cited the threat to police officers in pledging an unprecedented effort to charge those involved "on any level" in the riot..."
Yet, the Biden Administration walked back the charges, unraveled the earlier plea to a lesser offense, and told that court that the earlier charges would have resulted in “excessive sentencing” for the attorneys. Instead, they are supporting a maximum sentence of five years with a recommendation of between 18 to 24 months imprisonment...
They will now be given sentences closer to tax fraud than terrorism.
@George-K said in Lawyer up, guys.:
Turley continues:
"It is a sharp contrast to the harsh position taken by the Biden Justice Department on many of those accused of rioting on January 6th. AG Garland cited the threat to police officers in pledging an unprecedented effort to charge those involved "on any level" in the riot..."
Yet, the Biden Administration walked back the charges, unraveled the earlier plea to a lesser offense, and told that court that the earlier charges would have resulted in “excessive sentencing” for the attorneys. Instead, they are supporting a maximum sentence of five years with a recommendation of between 18 to 24 months imprisonment...
They will now be given sentences closer to tax fraud than terrorism.
Yet Navarro is placed in cuffs and leg irons, when a simple notification of arrest would have done.
-
@George-K said in Lawyer up, guys.:
Turley continues:
"It is a sharp contrast to the harsh position taken by the Biden Justice Department on many of those accused of rioting on January 6th. AG Garland cited the threat to police officers in pledging an unprecedented effort to charge those involved "on any level" in the riot..."
Yet, the Biden Administration walked back the charges, unraveled the earlier plea to a lesser offense, and told that court that the earlier charges would have resulted in “excessive sentencing” for the attorneys. Instead, they are supporting a maximum sentence of five years with a recommendation of between 18 to 24 months imprisonment...
They will now be given sentences closer to tax fraud than terrorism.
Yet Navarro is placed in cuffs and leg irons, when a simple notification of arrest would have done.
@Jolly said in Lawyer up, guys.:
Yet Navarro is placed in cuffs and leg irons, when a simple notification of arrest would have done.
Remember when Holder was held in contempt of congress for refusing to turn over documents about Fast and Furious, and they handcuffed him and frog-marched him to court?
Good times.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
I recall the storming of elderly Roger Stone’s residence as the government retaliated against a known Trump sympathizer. All of these situations would make lefties feel the country was heading to terrifying places, if they were right-on-left abuses of power. By our emotional reactions shall our political tribe be known.
-
I recall the storming of elderly Roger Stone’s residence as the government retaliated against a known Trump sympathizer. All of these situations would make lefties feel the country was heading to terrifying places, if they were right-on-left abuses of power. By our emotional reactions shall our political tribe be known.
@Horace said in Lawyer up, guys.:
I recall the storming of elderly Richard Stone’s residence as the government retaliated against a known Trump sympathizer. All of these situations would make lefties feel the country was heading to terrifying places, if they were right-on-left abuses of power. By our emotional reactions shall our political tribe be known.
Yes, a SWAT team was needed, along with a boat contingent for the waterway. Elderly men are notorious for their violence and evasiveness.
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
@Horace said in Lawyer up, guys.:
I recall the storming of elderly Richard Stone’s residence as the government retaliated against a known Trump sympathizer. All of these situations would make lefties feel the country was heading to terrifying places, if they were right-on-left abuses of power. By our emotional reactions shall our political tribe be known.
Yes, a SWAT team was needed, along with a boat contingent for the waterway. Elderly men are notorious for their violence and evasiveness.
-
@George-K said in Lawyer up, guys.:
@Jolly said in Lawyer up, guys.:
Yes, a SWAT team was needed
VDH:
These double standards could not be more obvious. This is what righteousness looks like in human cultural behavior. Rules for thee but not for me.
-
@Jolly said in Lawyer up, guys.:
Yet Navarro is placed in cuffs and leg irons, when a simple notification of arrest would have done.
Remember when Holder was held in contempt of congress for refusing to turn over documents about Fast and Furious, and they handcuffed him and frog-marched him to court?
Good times.
@George-K said in Lawyer up, guys.:
Remember when Holder was held in contempt of congress for refusing to turn over documents about Fast and Furious, and they handcuffed him and frog-marched him to court?
Good times.I'd forgotten about this one:
The resolution resolves that Lois G. Lerner, former Director, Exempt Organizations, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), be found in contempt of Congress for failure to testify before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform as required by a congressional subpoena.[1]
The resolution directs the Speaker of the House of Representatives to certify the committee's report detailing the refusal of Lerner to testify before the committee as directed by the subpoena to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia to the end that Lerner be proceeded against in the manner and form provided by law, and to otherwise take all appropriate action to enforce the subpoena.
