The recommendation for Rhodes is the longest thus far for any person charged in connection with the Capitol attack, reflecting what prosecutors see as his role in a key organizing figure for members of the far-right militia — even as Rhodes was never alleged to have entered the Capitol building itself on Jan. 6. [More]
So he not only never went in, they have no direct orders he issued to any specific person. The seditious conspiracy here is by the persecutors.
This is an act of judicial terrorism with a chilling, wider goal in mind. What else would you call “the deliberate creation of a sense of fear, usually by the use or threat of use of symbolic acts of physical violence, to influence the political behavior of a given target group”?
I guess the jurors were impressionable and manipulable enough to embrace the hysteria. It also raises a question I’ve had for some time for those whose liberty advocacy efforts center on Fully Informed Juries: Even though “text, history, and tradition” known to the Founders is on your side, your message is limited by those who control the media, and by prevailing legal establishment interests, to the echo chambers of the political fringes.
The arrogant f*** (from Portland, OR) who wrote that actually cites a law review article that compares telling free citizens about their nullification rights to telling children not to stick beans up their noses (“most of them would not have thought about it had it not been suggested”) and wrings his hands over how difficult the First Amendment makes full suppression.
And potentially sympathetic politicians, mindful of what the Swamp and the media would do to them, have little incentive to touch it.
So why not force wider discussion and open the eyes of more by creating ballot measures in states that allow it? Just the act of collecting signatures will raise awareness “outside the choir” (and I qualify the use of that term), and the fact that something is gaining steam, and maybe even getting on the ballot, will call attention to a freedom safeguard the would-be rulers desperately want to keep citizens from learning about.
We might stick beans up our noses.
I have a news flash for pundits of all political stripes.
The Anti-Federalists did not withhold ratification of the Constitution of the United States until a bill of rights was attached in an attempt to make the proposed new government’s job easier.
They did it in order to assure that already extant impediments deliberately placed in the paths of the existing state governments were replicated in the path of the proposed federal government.
No bill of rights -> no constitution -> no United States of America.
When the Federalists became convinced that the Anti-Federalists intended to throw the entire effort to replace the Articles of Confederation into the dustbin of history over the issue, they folded.