Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Arthur_Frain

(1,864 posts)
Thu Feb 8, 2024, 12:08 PM Feb 8

K Jackson's last question was brilliant

Mitchell’s answer may come back to haunt them.

She noted in his brief he was an ambivalent about whether Jan 6 was an insurrection. Asked what it was exactly. He weaseled around a lot but eventually he owned that “illegal and criminal acts occurred” still trying manfully to distance his client from what he tried to characterize as a riot. She smacked him down pretty good as to whether it makes a difference if the folks involved in attempting to overthrow the government were organized or disorgaanized. Her attitude was, why is the difference pertinent when the individuals involved in both have the same aim?

Priceless morning.

22 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
K Jackson's last question was brilliant (Original Post) Arthur_Frain Feb 8 OP
Why were people in the mob carrying zip ties and flex cuffs? That's not a spontaneous riot Walleye Feb 8 #1
I remember watching it live, that group that serpentined up the stairs in formation. Arthur_Frain Feb 8 #3
It was truly terrrifying they way they moved nt hibbing Feb 8 #18
why were some wearing matching tshirts that had to be made up for the occasion? orleans Feb 8 #15
Yup. I totally agree. Mr. Evil Feb 8 #21
Why were "peaceful patriots" carrying gallows to the Capitol grounds? LastLiberal in PalmSprings Feb 8 #16
Right? MontanaMama Feb 8 #19
A "riot" to cause interruption of a Constitutional function, is an INSURRECTION ProudMNDemocrat Feb 8 #2
The weasel words this lawyer is using. Arthur_Frain Feb 8 #4
"It will be wild" is an unusual way to describe a rally, speak easy Feb 8 #5
I think "stop the steal" says it all, how did they plan on stopping it? Walleye Feb 8 #20
It was part of the insurrection. temporary311 Feb 8 #8
Bingo!!!!!!!!!!! moniss Feb 8 #14
I hate Trump's guts, but screamcheese Feb 8 #6
Yep. rubbersole Feb 8 #11
I agree with you on this. SCOTUS (a majority IMO) seemed very skeptical about this based on their comments. Texin Feb 8 #12
Well Scream....... DENVERPOPS Feb 8 #22
I hate Trump's guts, but screamcheese Feb 8 #7
Oops screamcheese Feb 8 #9
Great question from K Jackson! samsingh Feb 8 #10
I'm glad at least one of them looked at the insurrection side of this argument. ificandream Feb 8 #13
She also said this: Polybius Feb 8 #17

Arthur_Frain

(1,864 posts)
3. I remember watching it live, that group that serpentined up the stairs in formation.
Thu Feb 8, 2024, 12:30 PM
Feb 8

It was chilling. The proud boys and oath keepers were tfg’s shock troops.

orleans

(34,079 posts)
15. why were some wearing matching tshirts that had to be made up for the occasion?
Thu Feb 8, 2024, 02:33 PM
Feb 8

(i can't remember what they said but it was def. organized / planned)

16. Why were "peaceful patriots" carrying gallows to the Capitol grounds?
Thu Feb 8, 2024, 02:36 PM
Feb 8

I grew up in the 70s and I don't remember anyone ever bringing gallows to a gathering to protest the Vietnam war.

ProudMNDemocrat

(16,808 posts)
2. A "riot" to cause interruption of a Constitutional function, is an INSURRECTION
Thu Feb 8, 2024, 12:26 PM
Feb 8

TSF incited the crowd of supporters at the Elipse to interrupt the counting of Electoral Votes. He urged his supporters in a Tweet the previous December to "come to DC on January 6th. It will be wild."

Attorney Mitchell did TSF no favors.

temporary311

(955 posts)
8. It was part of the insurrection.
Thu Feb 8, 2024, 01:54 PM
Feb 8

Last edited Thu Feb 8, 2024, 02:41 PM - Edit history (1)

The other part was to happen after SS whisked Pence away using the rioters as the excuse. Grassley would then take over Pence's duties and accept the fraudulent ballots from the fake electors.

screamcheese

(76 posts)
6. I hate Trump's guts, but
Thu Feb 8, 2024, 01:51 PM
Feb 8

I listened to the entire SCOTUS hearing and I believe Colorado presented a weak case. I also believe Colorado did the right thing according to the letter of the Constitution but if they prevail, it will open a Pandora's Box in every state where ever MAGAS want to stir up chaos. I can see a future where every election is held up in litigation. Better to let the ballot exclusion issue pass and concentrate on getting the vote out so that there is an overwhelming verdict against Trump at the ballot box.

rubbersole

(6,734 posts)
11. Yep.
Thu Feb 8, 2024, 01:59 PM
Feb 8

Can you imagine desantis and his ilk going after every election they know they are going to lose? TSF will be slaughtered at the ballot box and take the gop with him. Hoping he remains the repub nominee until November. Watching the meltdown is going to be my summer/fall favorite pastime. 🍿

Texin

(2,599 posts)
12. I agree with you on this. SCOTUS (a majority IMO) seemed very skeptical about this based on their comments.
Thu Feb 8, 2024, 02:23 PM
Feb 8

I think they'll rule against Colorado and for TFG. On the other hand, if they decide to grant cert on the decision by the judges in the immunity decision, I think they'll argue to uphold the ruling that was announced on Monday.

DENVERPOPS

(8,847 posts)
22. Well Scream.......
Thu Feb 8, 2024, 03:15 PM
Feb 8

Given all that we have seen, culminating in the J6 near anarchy at the Capitol.........If Biden wins again, I fear the 70 Million Trump Humpers will go ballistic........and it won't just be the U.S. Capitol that gets placed under seige, but every State Capitol across the country, esp "BLUE" states.............

Even if Trump wins, I predict the same lawless period will take place, so the maggots can drive their point home across all the states that they are in command........

Trump will pardon all those in prison/jails already, and promise pardons in the future for any of their acts of carnage. Anyone not WHITE, is in danger. Anyone not their pseudo Christianity cult, is in Danger. It will get insane....

Any member of the Military who is a mole, also any un-announced Trump Humpers in the National Guard, or Reserves, will all come out of the woodwork. Same for the Border Patrol, Secret Service, FBI, DOJ, CIA, NSA, the list is endless......

Katie Bar The Door People. I think it's safe to say, given all that we have seen the past45+ years, and especially the past 6+ years, that 2024 is going to be a set of events, unlike this country has seen since its inception.........

The Republicans are hell bent to destroy the USA and Make it CSA.....Corporate States of America.
A Corporate Fascist Tyranny........

And they have already shown us, they are willing to do everything and anything to succeed..... Far Worse than J6

screamcheese

(76 posts)
7. I hate Trump's guts, but
Thu Feb 8, 2024, 01:52 PM
Feb 8

I listened to the entire SCOTUS hearing and I believe Colorado presented a weak case. I also believe Colorado did the right thing according to the letter of the Constitution but if they prevail, it will open a Pandora's Box in every state where ever MAGAS want to stir up chaos. I can see a future where every election is held up in litigation. Better to let the ballot exclusion issue pass and concentrate on getting the vote out so that there is an overwhelming verdict against Trump at the ballot box.

Polybius

(15,506 posts)
17. She also said this:
Thu Feb 8, 2024, 02:38 PM
Feb 8
During oral arguments Thursday, Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson questioned why the president was not listed in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

"Why didn't they put the word president in the very enumerated list in Section 3?" Brown asked Colorado voters' lawyer Jason Murray. "The thing that really is troubling to me is I totally understand your argument, but they were listing people that were barred and president is not there. And so I guess that just makes me worry that maybe they weren't focusing on the president."

Murray responded with a reference to history.

"This came up in the debates in Congress over Section 3, where Robert Johnson said, 'Why haven't you included the president and vice president in the language?' And Sen. Murrell responds, 'We have. Look at the language "any office under the United States."'"

"Yes, but doesn't that at least suggest ambiguity?" Jackson responded.


The 14th Amendment, Section 3 of the Constitution states, "No person shall… hold any office… under the United States … who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States… to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»K Jackson's last question...