Prosecution rests in first trial of Capitol riot defendant Guy Reffitt

You claimed it was a nothing burger. These felonies shouldn’t be prosecuted?

  1. obstruction of an official proceeding,
  2. being unlawfully present on Capitol grounds while armed with a firearm,
  3. transporting firearms during a civil disorder,
  4. interfering with law enforcement officers during a civil disorder,

There’s no question regarding him being prosecuted if he brought a gun to this! Hammer him!! That said, the rest is more of this same thing. It’s a different facet of this same instance. Did he ever pull it out? Did he ever threaten anyone with it? I’ve not seen evidence of that. It sounds like these are all different charges for the same thing. If you have a gun there…you transported it.

1 Like

The classic, “the world has gone crazy” defense.

Putin and Xi are eating this up.

Throw the book at them all.

…now it all makes sense…sittin here, drinkin beer…talkin God Amen. :sunglasses: :tumbler_glass:

…for all the Yankees.

1 Like

As far as I’m concerned, that son can say goodbye to his inheritance of rusty hubcaps, broken washing machine parts and half used bondo cans.

5 Likes

…and potentially a life time supply of “chew”. :sunglasses: :tumbler_glass:

2 Likes

Thank Capitol he had a snitch for a son. That pound of flesh isn’t gonna carve itself. :rofl:

2 Likes

All I can say to this poor persecuted man who threatened to kill his own child is this:

“We love you, you’re very special. We’ve seen what happens, you see the way others are treated that are so bad and so evil. I know you how feel.” Donald Trump

1 Like

Good little tool of the state.

3 Likes

5q1zw1

Snitching!!! :wink:

1 Like

Well some would say he acted like a normal decent human being. But we see how you feel.

1 Like

The state is the divine idea as it exists on earth. …this final end has supreme right against the individual, whose supreme duty is to be a member of the state.

Hegel

2 Likes

Some :sheep:

1 Like

So for the record, you think the son was wrong. That is your official position?

Courts and the federal and state governments recognize the spousal privilege in order to protect marital relationships from the harm that would befall them if spouses could be forced to testify against each other. However, this goal must be balanced against the competing need to avoid the harm caused when evidence is withheld from trials. Balancing these competing needs has resulted in various exceptions to, and underlying requirements for, the spousal privilege.

The relationship between the parents and their children, especially still living at home, should bear a similar equivalence in the eyes of the court IMO.

State before family, komrade

1 Like

So your official position is that the son did the wrong thing?

Again.