As another Lame Cherry exclusive in matter anti matter.
The Lame Cherry is seated here frowning, not over what the courts did Americans after January 6th and this dog and pony show in media of stirring controversy, but over the Department of Justice statement in the sentencing of the Proud Boys. I may have looked up who these groups are, but I do not remember nor care as half of their members are FBI assets.
What has me frowning is the statement below. The reason I'm frowning is, should not we as Americans expect a higher quality of legal statements from our Justice System? I mean if you are at a NASA hearing, you expect something more than, "How our rockets work is they go varoom"?
Before you read the statement, I desire to lead you into it as the DOJ is stating it is convicting people to intimidate the mass population as there will be consequences, meaning brutal torture of Americans in being held forever, not getting a trial, being beat up and forced to commit suicide, if you question an election.
Now here is what I'm frowning about, as this is a US Attorney I think. That is like 7 years in a big university with some rather anal professors and you do not get to be a US Attorney by donating 3 dollars to Joe Biden.
The word that made me frown is UNHAPPY. The DOJ is threatening Americans who were unhappy with the results of 2020 and all future elections.
That is perplexing to me and it is puzzling in why I'm frowning. UNHAPPY is not a legal term. It is a ridiculous broad term in fact, as like Pontius Pilate asked in "What is Truth?', the same can be asked
"What is being unhappy?"
Meet you on the other side.
“We need to make sure the consequences are abundantly clear to anyone who might be unhappy with the results of 2024, 2028, 2032 or any future election for as long as this case is remembered,” prosecutor Conor Mulroe said. “This was a calculated act of terrorism.”
I looked up the word UNHAPPY, and it is an emotion of being sad or a feeling of distress. So if someone was sad at the thought of the 2020 elections, because they were distressed over Joe Biden goading Russia into a nuclear war in Ukraine, is this what the DOJ is going to use as the base of prosecution?
Is someone like Barron Trump, who was sad his dad had to leave the White House because he really liked the White House pudding the chef made is this something that is going set off the FBI SWAT sweeps, because a kid is not getting pudding at every meal?
The US Attorney said ANYONE. So does this mean that someone like Hillary Clinton who was unhappy that the election was handed to Joe Biden, as she is an old bag who is running out of time before the mortician starts measuring her for casket size, that she is going on an FBI list to be prosecuted?
Meet you on the other side.
Unhappy:
Experiencing or marked by or causing sadness or sorrow or discontent
Generalized feeling of distress
Causing discomfort
The Lame Cherry for legal sake, as this is a US Judge who is being spoken too as much as the people. This is the entire DOJ being represented and the word chosen to base prosecutions on is "unhappy"?
If I was head of the US Attorney's I would haul in this prosecutor and inquire if they needed help in writing statements as unhappy makes me unhappy as it reflects on a low degree of judicial verbiage, which is going to interfere with my one day being placed as a judge on the courts, because I did not keep the DOJ from being embarrassed.
The correct legal verbiage should have been something like,
The Department of Justice requires to define criminal law, regarding United States elections, that any criminal acts defined by the Constitution and going beyond the Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press, Freedom of Gathering for Protest, which involve physical threats, violent intimidation to negate the governance of peaceful transference of power, will be subject to prosecution for their actions, not their emotions.
That type of statement would get you appointed a judge as it shows a very contemplative legal mind.
The statement then ends with what took place was calculated terrorism. Ok this is the definition of terrorism.
The systematic use of violence as a means to intimidate or coerce societies or governments
As Joe Biden was installed to 1600 Penn Avenue, as no members of Congress were touched, as Donald Trump ended up the same day in his Florida mansion, and as NO WEAPONS were found on the Jan6 gathering, only on federal agents, there is zero evidence of systematic violence.
Of course the obvious is what the US Attorney stated in the DOJ means to coerce, intimidate and repress anyone who is unhappy with an election. We know from Attorney General Merrick Garland that the summer of riot and burning of America by ANTIFA and BLM was not terrorism, because it happened at night and Jan6 was terrorism, because it happened during the day. The AG has never explained what that ridiculous statement meant, but again this is all meant to intimidate one group of people, so another group which controls the hedge funds, and gets genocide in Ukraine, so the hedge funds will control investment there for payoffs, will get to continue on with these bizarre Hunter Biden crimes where the Secret Service and ATF cover up the Biden family crimes.
The law is a beautiful thing. It is not because things are in Latin. It is because the law is eloquent. You never hear the lezbos on the Supreme Court write an opinion with, "This makes me unhappy" as they would be ridiculed.
What the DOJ stated is that it will like General Sherman's March through Atlanta so terrify the South, that they would not think about war again for 100 years. That is what the DOJ is engaged in, in very crude Olde English verbiage, instead of the Norman French eloquence of what legal writs are created as. The DOJ states that if anyone who is not going to agree with any election that they will be destroyed like the ground of Sherman's March to Atlanta. That is burning down your house, shooting your dog, driving your kids off to die in the swamp as the regime steals everything you have. In actuality, the US Attorney should have stated that in court as it would be more eloquent in explaining what the DOJ has been engaged in and will continue to hunt people down for the next 20 years. This would fit in Lincoln's occupation of the South for 2 decades to make the South a feudal occupied zone for the federal regime, a land without rights for those who disagreed that Republicans should only be voted for and the Black race would be promoted over all other people in Dixie.
I did read in the linked article that terrorism was shaking a metal guard which keeps crowds behind it. The Lame Cherry ponders that legaleeze as for example, Sheikh bin Laden had jets flowing into the Pentagon and the Twin Towers which is terrorism. The courts now state this 9 11 terrorism of mass murder is equal to shaking a barricade.
I just do not believe that George W. Bush would have gotten America to go to war if Shiekh bin Laden had shaken a barricade at the Twin Towers and the Pentagon.
We just need a better communication from the DOJ as what they are issuing is embarrassing to everyone. Terrorism from the time of Thomas Jefferson, Ronald Reagan to George Bush was an event not of criminal prosecution but of war. Being unhappy means you cry or sulk, not that you are involved in violence. Being unhappy is not a felony or most women would be in prison due to the lesbians or men they are with.
The problem is the DOJ is engendering the wrong words for their terrifying of Americans who do not agree with the hedge fund billionaire homosexuals. The DOJ has to admit that their goal is to destroy political discourse of some groups and they will destroy life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for people questioning what is the narrative. We can leave then leave the silliness of "unhappy" and the mismatch of terrorism behind, and agree that when Joe Biden for the Vice Presidency which Birther Husssein Obama sold for terrorizing Lawrence Sinclair, is the status norm of weaponizing the courts against people who get framed by the DIA in operations like Jan6.
Something like 2000 people have been hunted down for Jan6, and the FBI is still hunting, except for the federal asset who is the DC Pipe Bomber as they have this person's license plate number and are not arresting them, because they were part of this operation. I think it was like 7 people were sentenced to this terror sentences. The point is those numbers do not reflect an insurrection or stopping the government from working. Seven failures, as these people did fail in overthrowing the government is not exactly a threat to the United States.
Here is the summation of a case which a Judge rightly called the crime of the century, in the stealing of the plans for the atomic bomb for the Soviet Union, which is more than rattling police barricades. Notice the eloquence in federal prosecutor Irving Saypol. His intent was on the indicted, not on burning down Atlanta for the next 20 years. His words are concise, precise and legally beautiful in their intelligence and consideration of the law.
Ladies and gentlemen, you have heard statements of defense counsel here concerning the injection of communism in this case. I repeat again, these defendants are not on trial for being Communists. I don't want you to convict them merely because of their Communist activity. Communism, as the testimony has demonstrated, has a very definite place in this case because it is the Communist ideology which teaches worship and devotion to the Soviet Union over our own government. It has provided the motive and inspiration for these people to do the terrible things which have been proven against them. It is this adherence and devotion which makes clear their intent and motivation in carrying out this conspiracy to commit espionage
As we are told that Jan6 is the crime of the century. Should not the legal statements rise to this to convince Americans that the definitions and punishments fits the crime.
Rhetorical. Of course they should.
Nuff Said
agtG
