Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, July 27, 2021

Danny Cevallos: Tampa resident Paul Hodgkins, who was photographed marching onto the Senate floor during the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, was sentenced to eight months in federal prison last week.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

More from the article...

...Tampa resident Paul Hodgkins, who was photographed marching onto the Senate floor during the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, was sentenced to eight months in federal prison last week.

He got a huge break.

It's not likely to happen to other convicted Capitol rioters....


The OpEd is an interesting deeper dive into the possible rationale behind sentencing of those involved in the Jan 6 insurrection attempt.

#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-07-27 10:18 AM | Reply

8 months is absolutely ridiculous.

The idea that white privilege doesn't exist is PROVEN wrong with this sentence.

#2 | Posted by Sycophant at 2021-07-27 11:28 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

I don't think it matters whether the moronic bragging and boasting takes place online. Before social media, people got caught because told their friends about it in person or over the phone, or they documented what they did for their own memories indicating they were proud of their actions.

Although social media has certainly made it easier for idiots to get caught.

#3 | Posted by sentinel at 2021-07-27 11:33 AM | Reply

"8 months is absolutely ridiculous."

If someone got 8 months in prison for trespassing on federal property while protesting the building of an oil pipeline, would you say the same?

"The idea that white privilege doesn't exist is PROVEN wrong with this sentence."

Everything's about race, when you're a racist.

#4 | Posted by sentinel at 2021-07-27 11:37 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

@#5 ... trespassing on federal property while protesting the building of an oil pipeline ...

False equivalence.

#5 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-07-27 11:41 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

False equivalence.

That's all they've got.

#6 | Posted by jpw at 2021-07-27 12:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"False equivalence.

Are you saying this individual did more than just interfere with a federal operation while trespassing on federal property? It appears the prosecutors did not have evidence of that.

#7 | Posted by sentinel at 2021-07-27 12:32 PM | Reply

Are you suggesting protesting a pipeline is the same thing as trying to prevent the transfer of power after an election?

#8 | Posted by jpw at 2021-07-27 12:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#8, they're both interfering with the execution of a legal federal operation.

#9 | Posted by sentinel at 2021-07-27 12:47 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

So yes, you're saying protesting a pipeline is the same as overturning an election.

#10 | Posted by jpw at 2021-07-27 12:56 PM | Reply

Sentinel seems really committed to downplaying the insurrection.

#11 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-07-27 12:59 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 4

Do you think driving a get away car is the same as murdering a bank teller. The law does.

If the 1/6ers committed violence they are terrorists and should get the max sentence.

#12 | Posted by bored at 2021-07-27 01:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

@#7 ... It appears the prosecutors did not have evidence of that. ...

From the cited op-ed...

...Hodgkins admitted that he committed the crime of corruptly obstructing and impeding the certification of the Electoral College vote count, which was an "official proceeding" under the law....

Again your comment is attempting a false equivalence.

#13 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-07-27 01:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#10, did this individual in this story overturn an election? No. He trespassed on federal property, just as many pipeline protesters do to interfere with the construction of a federally mandated project.

People who assaulted police officers, broke down barriers or vandalized federal property? Sure, throw the book at them. But comparing what this guy did to those people is the false equivalency.

#14 | Posted by sentinel at 2021-07-27 01:18 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#10, did this individual in this story overturn an election?

Do protestors usually stop a pipeline from being built?

You're reaching.

Like most closet insurrection supporters.

#15 | Posted by jpw at 2021-07-27 01:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

People who assaulted police officers, broke down barriers or vandalized federal property? Sure, throw the book at them. But comparing what this guy did to those people is the false equivalency.

#14 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

They didn't.

Because he didn't do those things is why he got off comparatively light.

But he was still part of the riot who's aim it was to disrupt the transition of power.

Which is what you're falsely equating to protesting a pipeline.

#16 | Posted by jpw at 2021-07-27 01:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

But there really is no such thing as "similar conduct" here, at least not from a historical perspective. Even the prosecutors in Hodgkins' case conceded that the Jan. 6 crimes are unprecedented. They defy comparison.

Get it yet?

Or are you going to conveniently neglect his purpose in being there for the entirety of this argument?

#17 | Posted by jpw at 2021-07-27 01:30 PM | Reply

No one will have much sympathy for them.

LOL unless they're insurrectionists!

#18 | Posted by jpw at 2021-07-27 01:33 PM | Reply

@#14 ... did this individual in this story overturn an election? No. He trespassed on federal property, just as many pipeline protesters do to interfere with the construction of a federally mandated project. ...

From the cited op-ed...

...Hodgkins admitted that he committed the crime of corruptly obstructing and impeding the certification of the Electoral College vote count, which was an "official proceeding" under the law....

A federally mandated construction project is quite different than the certification of Election results.

But keep trying with your failed attempts at false equivalencies.

It just shows the weakness of what you post.


#19 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-07-27 01:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

@#16 ... Because he didn't do those things is why he got off comparatively light. ...

There were more reasons list in the article why he got off comparatively light, in addition to the one you mention.

Funny how your comments seem to conveniently forget them...

#20 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-07-27 01:46 PM | Reply

@#20
For example...

...First, Hodgkins took the well-traveled path taken by other famous infamous criminals, such as Michael Cohen, or Felicity Huffman. He raced to court and pleaded guilty as fast as he could, to get the best possible deal. In the highly-structured federal sentencing scheme, pleading guilty early earns an offender valuable bonus reductions....

#21 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-07-27 01:48 PM | Reply

"They didn't.
Because he didn't do those things is why he got off comparatively light."

The original comment I responded to said "8 months is absolutely ridiculous." It sure sounds a complaint the he wasn't sentenced as if what he did was equivalent to what the violent rioters did.

"But he was still part of the riot who's aim it was to disrupt the transition of power.
Which is what you're falsely equating to protesting a pipeline."

In both cases it's intending to disrupt or obstruct a federally mandated proceeding.

#22 | Posted by sentinel at 2021-07-27 01:52 PM | Reply

#21 The best part of this is the worst of them will not admit they did anything wrong and end up with the longest sentences.

#23 | Posted by bored at 2021-07-27 01:55 PM | Reply

Funny how your comments seem to conveniently forget them...
#20 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER

I read it.

I thought the rest were irrelevant as I don't think you'd get off light for assaulting an officer by pleading guilty quickly.

#24 | Posted by jpw at 2021-07-27 01:57 PM | Reply

In both cases it's intending to disrupt or obstruct a federally mandated proceeding.

#22 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

I don't need you to restate your obtuse point.

I need you to get an adult to explain to you that degrees of severity exist and it's absurd to compare the construction of a pipeline to the transfer of power following an election.

#25 | Posted by jpw at 2021-07-27 01:58 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

@#22 ... In both cases it's intending to disrupt or obstruct a federally mandated proceeding. ...

Not really.

In one case it is intending to disrupt a construction project.

In the other case it is intending to disrupt an official proceeding.

Sorry, a construction project is not an official proceeding.

Nice try.


#26 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-07-27 01:59 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

@#25 ... that degrees of severity exist ...

That's an important point to note here.

#27 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-07-27 02:09 PM | Reply

Is one federally mandated operation more holy or sacred than the other? Is it because the operation is carried out by elected government employees rather than temp workers and contractors?

#28 | Posted by sentinel at 2021-07-27 02:18 PM | Reply

" Is one federally mandated operation more holy or sacred than the other?"

Yes. By several orders of magnitude.

I can't believe someone is actually asking that question. Building a pipeline vs. the peaceful transfer of power?!? Are you serious?!?

#29 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-07-27 02:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Is one federally mandated operation more holy or sacred than the other?

You're joking, right?

Let's play a game called "What if They Win."

Pipeline protestors win = no pipeline. Well, at least that particular pipeline.

Insurrectionists win = no more United States.

So tell me, is one operation more holy than the other?

#30 | Posted by jpw at 2021-07-27 02:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#8, they're both interfering with the execution of a legal federal operation.
#9 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

Uncle Sam is building the pipeline? Like the Army Corps of Engineers or something?

I thought TransCanada Corpration was building the pipeline.

#31 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-07-27 02:45 PM | Reply

"So tell me, is one operation more holy than the other?"

I don't accept the premise that the United States is so fragile that it would cease to exist if a Congressional proceeding is delayed for more than a few hours. So no, I don't agree with attaching religious significance to one any more than the other. Otherwise we should imprison hecklers from the gallery and all protesters on the street, since their aim is also to disrupt official proceedings.

#32 | Posted by sentinel at 2021-07-27 03:08 PM | Reply

The pipeline protestors were exercising their constitutionally protected rights to peacefully protest. Multiple law enforcement agencies violently attacked the peaceful protestors.
1/6 terrorists, incited by Trump, violently attacked the police causing many injuries and several deaths and threatened the lives of politicians while storming the Capitol, with the intent of preventing Biden from taking his rightful place as the 46th POTUS.

Only Nazis think these things are remotely similar.

#33 | Posted by bored at 2021-07-27 03:09 PM | Reply

Tommy Chong is ostensibly White and they gave him a longer sentence for weed possession.

Either this guy ratted out everybody or the system needs to be changed this year.

#34 | Posted by Tor at 2021-07-27 03:20 PM | Reply

I don't accept the premise that the United States is so fragile that it would cease to exist if a Congressional proceeding is delayed for more than a few hours.

That is what's known as a strawman.

The fact that fighting against the core of our Constitutional Republic is abstract doesn't make it less important.

#35 | Posted by jpw at 2021-07-27 03:26 PM | Reply

Some pipeline protesters violently assault those executing the pipeline project. Others disrupt the proceeding by marching into the path of the bulldozer and obstructing it. Others stand on the sidelines and picket/heckle the workers. Pretending the pipeline protesters are equivalent to peaceful demonstrators exercising their Constitutional rights makes you sound like the people who make the same spurious claim about all 1/6 protesters.

#36 | Posted by sentinel at 2021-07-27 03:29 PM | Reply

Pretending the pipeline protesters are equivalent to peaceful demonstrators exercising their Constitutional rights makes you sound like the people who make the same spurious claim about all 1/6 protesters.
#36 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

Continuing to push false equivalencies doesn't change their false nature.

You don't even remember what our original point was, do you? Because you're wandering all over the damned place.

#37 | Posted by jpw at 2021-07-27 03:59 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Tommy Chong is ostensibly White and they gave him a longer sentence for weed possession."

Asians prove CRT is true.

#38 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-07-27 04:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I don't accept the premise that the United States is so fragile that it would cease to exist if a Congressional proceeding is delayed for more than a few hours. So no, I don't agree with attaching religious significance to one any more than the other. Otherwise we should imprison hecklers from the gallery and all protesters on the street, since their aim is also to disrupt official proceedings.

#32 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

It is far more fragile than your little mind can perceive.

#39 | Posted by truthhurts at 2021-07-27 04:10 PM | Reply

Just to instill some facts

www.lawinsider.com

Official proceeding means a proceeding heard before any legislative, judicial, administrative or other governmental agency or official authorized to hear evidence under oath, including any referee, hearing examiner, commissioner, notary or other person taking testimony or depositions in any such proceedings.

sooooo, legislature meeting is official proceeding, construction is not an official proceeding

#40 | Posted by truthhurts at 2021-07-27 04:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

@#40 ... sooooo, legislature meeting is official proceeding, construction is not an official proceeding ...

Worth repeating...

sooooo, legislature meeting is official proceeding, construction is not an official proceeding

#41 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-07-27 04:42 PM | Reply

@#37 ... Continuing to push false equivalencies doesn't change their false nature. ...

In addition to the false equivalencies, there is the amorphous nature of what he is trying to assert. Like he's just throwing it at the wall trying to see what sticks.

(btw, my comment a while ago was misdirected. Apologies.)

#42 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-07-27 04:46 PM | Reply

Again, the original point I was responding to was "8 months is absolutely ridiculous." I'm sure those who supported the insurrection would agree with that statement, but for a different reason.

I do not agree with that statement.

#43 | Posted by sentinel at 2021-07-27 08:22 PM | Reply

In both cases it's intending to disrupt or obstruct a federally mandated proceeding.
#22 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

^
You lie.
You keep lying.

#44 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-07-27 08:32 PM | Reply

"You lie."

Nice Joe Wilson impression.

I'm just like Obama.

#45 | Posted by sentinel at 2021-07-27 08:56 PM | Reply

I think the article explained why he got the sentence he did. He didn't smash anything, he didn't steal anything, he didn't threaten or commit any violence against anyone. He has no prior criminal record. He took accountability for his actions, admitted he was wrong and showed remorse for his actions.
The judge did what a judge should do...take everything into consideration and render a sentence the is appropriate for the actions.
I feel certain that those who were destroying and stealing property, threatening, attacking and injuring officers will face much stiffer sentences as they should. I expect to see 8-10 years for these folks.

#46 | Posted by ScottE at 2021-07-28 01:07 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

(btw, my comment a while ago was misdirected. Apologies.)
#42 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER

No worries, I suspected :)

#47 | Posted by jpw at 2021-07-28 02:24 AM | Reply

@#46 ... I think the article explained why he got the sentence he did ...

Yup.

One of my hopes about the upcoming and ongoing Jan 6 trials is that the Justice system does not get caught up in the political emotions that are so present in the Country nowadays. That the Justice system functions as it should in a democratic Republic. That, in short, it goes for Justice, not revenge.

#48 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-07-28 10:32 AM | Reply

#45 | POSTED BY SENTINEL AT 2021-07-27 08:56 PM | FLAG:

Are we comparing protests?

At Standing Rock, a private security company declared protesters to be in league with jihadists, and then along with police went ahead and pepper sprayed and turned attack dogs on the protesters.

In DC, a bunch of wacky, mostly white, right wing conspiracy nuts and the core of their cosplaying militia loonies rioted and trashed the capital because they're sore losers in denial.

Maybe we're thinking of Portland where a bunch of left wing nuts tried to burn a Federal courthouse? The majority of the cases have been dismissed. However, just like the Jan 6 riot, the people that did serious crimes with solid evidence against them are facing felony charges and prison time.

#49 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2021-07-28 10:51 AM | Reply

"Are we comparing protests?"

Yes. The supporters of the insurrection are desperate to downplay the significance of Jan 6th. They do this by trying to compare what happened that day to BLM riots. What happened on Jan hasn't happened in America for over one hundred years.

And ...

After witnessing the testimony of the officers that defended the capital that day I believe anyone who participated in any way, before during or after, in the attempt to overthrow our democracy on Jan 6th should get the maximum sentence allowed.

Period.

#50 | Posted by donnerboy at 2021-07-29 11:08 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"If someone got 8 months in prison for trespassing on federal property while protesting the building of an oil pipeline, would you say the same?"

The comparison is utter nonsense. Protesting an oil pipeline to protect the environment is hardly the same thing as an attempted coup. Many believe the coup attempers should have faced a firing squad. I don't know for sure if I would want them shot but I think they deserve far more than 8 months. The only reason today that anyone can deny it was a coup attempt is because they failed so miserably, if it wasn't a coup attempt then why was the National Guard not called in far sooner?

#51 | Posted by danni at 2021-07-29 06:46 PM | Reply

"Yes. The supporters of the insurrection are desperate to downplay the significance of Jan 6th. They do this by trying to compare what happened that day to BLM riots. What happened on Jan hasn't happened in America for over one hundred years."

It's not downplaying what happened on Jan 6th to point out the similarities which do in fact exist between it and other violent protests. You want to not just downplay but completely deny any similarities. Namely, the similarities of those who either ignored the violence or implied it was justified because the respective protests were for "a good cause" (from their point of view), and the similarities of those who want all the protesters treated exactly the same way as those who committed the most violent acts or had intentions of mayhem.

I'm not in either of these categories, but it appears that you and a number of others here are in the latter, at least when it comes to Jan. 6...

"And ...
After witnessing the testimony of the officers that defended the capital that day I believe anyone who participated in any way, before during or after, in the attempt to overthrow our democracy on Jan 6th should get the maximum sentence allowed.
Period."

That's an emotional response. Like comparing the event to 9/11, or suggesting it's even more significant than 9/11 ("hasn't happened in America for over one hundred years.") There have been numerous attacks on the U.S. government over the past 100 years that were more severe than this one.

Accusing me of trying to "downplay" the clusterf*ck that happened on Jan 6 for pointing this out is also an emotional response. I believe that those who committed or organized violence on that day should be prosecuted aggressively. I also believe there were people on that day who were just there to demonstrate, like people who went to picket Bush's or Trump's inaugurations, and never expected they'd end up following a crowd into a restricted area of the Capitol. The guy who got 8 months after pleading guilty sounds like one of those people.

#52 | Posted by sentinel at 2021-07-31 12:04 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2021 World Readable

Drudge Retort