Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, September 06, 2022

A New Mexico judge ordered Otero County Commissioner Couy Griffin be removed from office, effective immediately, ruling that the attack on the Capitol was an insurrection and that Griffin's participation in it disqualified him under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

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.

Finally. All those fools should be tossed.

#1 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-09-06 12:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Now that we've ruled it was an insurrection can we start putting those previously sentenced for rioting on trial for their real crime?

#2 | Posted by Tor at 2022-09-06 12:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

A good start.

#3 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-06 12:46 PM | Reply

1869... four years after the Civil War ended in 1865.

So there's also a precedent in Conservatives refusing to accept that their side lost for YEARS AND YEARS.

#4 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-06 12:53 PM | Reply

And so, after all, you can't take a ---- on the floor of the Capitol and still hold public office in the United States?

#5 | Posted by Zed at 2022-09-06 03:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

People like Couy Griffin used to get the death sentence. Now he's merely barred from receiving a government paycheck (and might even get it back on appeal).

#6 | Posted by JOE at 2022-09-06 03:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Republicans who voted not to Certify should be among those prohibited. They were complicit AF!

Republicans who continue to be election deniers should be prohibited as well.

Republicans who exhorted and incited the insurrection must be prohibited, FFS!

Republicans who promoted and participated in the false Elector Scheme should be prohibited as well. (Lookin at you Ron Johnson)

#7 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2022-09-06 03:41 PM | Reply

I wish we'd stop picking and choosing what and when we enforce provisions granted to us by the Constitution. It's getting aggravating.

#8 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2022-09-06 03:45 PM | Reply

Disagreement with the majority is extremism and forbidden. Democracy means that only Democrats may rule.

#9 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-06 03:47 PM | Reply


Now that we've ruled it was an insurrection can we start putting those previously sentenced for rioting on trial for their real crime?

Was he found guilty of insurrection?

If not what is the actual requirement?

What does a totalitarian state look like?


Republicans who voted not to Certify should be among those prohibited.

Plenty of D's have done the same.

#10 | Posted by oneironaut at 2022-09-06 03:47 PM | Reply

Interesting. So, he said wasn't charged with a crime and didn't unlawfully enter the grounds. This will be appealed on 1st amendment grounds.

#11 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-09-06 03:56 PM | Reply

So, he said wasn't charged with a crime and didn't unlawfully enter the grounds

And yet the article says "Following a federal indictment for his behavior, he was convicted of breaching and occupying restricted Capitol grounds."

Why are you so allergic to facts?

#12 | Posted by JOE at 2022-09-06 03:58 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

#12. I didn't see that when I read the article at the top of this page.

#13 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-09-06 04:04 PM | Reply

Biden's America, you don't need to be convicted to be guilty.

#14 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-06 04:17 PM | Reply

Disagreement with the majority is extremism and forbidden. Democracy means that only Democrats may rule.

#9 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

STFU idiot.

#15 | Posted by jpw at 2022-09-06 04:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

There's a list of congressional republicans who should also be kicked out of the Governor based on this same ruling.

Not to mention Cruz, Graham and Hawley.

#16 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-09-06 04:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Now that we've ruled

"We" didnt rule anything, New Mexico did.

#17 | Posted by boaz at 2022-09-06 04:25 PM | Reply

Now that we've ruled it was an insurrection can we start putting those previously sentenced for rioting on trial for their real crime?

Was he found guilty of insurrection?
If not what is the actual requirement?
What does a totalitarian state look like?

Here comes the relativism. Just admit you hate your country, dick bag.

Republicans who voted not to Certify should be among those prohibited.

Plenty of D's have done the same.
#10 | POSTED BY ONEIRONAUT

Link?

They've raised objections but, to my knowledge, still voted to certify because the objection was to make a point, not stop the peaceful transition of power.

#18 | Posted by jpw at 2022-09-06 04:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Biden's America, you don't need to be convicted to be guilty.
#14 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

He was convicted. Another illiterate Republican.

#19 | Posted by JOE at 2022-09-06 04:25 PM | Reply

Biden's America, you don't need to be convicted to be guilty.

#14 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

Non-dumb ---- America doesn't need to wait for a guilty verdict when there's ------- selfies, social media posts and interviews where he brags about it freely available to find and read/listen to.

So again, STFU idiot.

#20 | Posted by jpw at 2022-09-06 04:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

He was convicted. Another illiterate Republican.

#19 | POSTED BY JOE

It's not a literacy problem.

It's a living in an idiotic bubble problem.

#21 | Posted by jpw at 2022-09-06 04:28 PM | Reply

Why do so many of you continue to pretend like the majority of trolls aren't Russians?

#22 | Posted by Tor at 2022-09-06 04:30 PM | Reply

Now that we've ruled
"We" didnt rule anything, New Mexico did.

#17 | POSTED BY BOAZ AT 2022-09-06 04:25 PM | REPLY

How sweet the Daughter Diddler is also an insurrectionist. Putin Pedophilia on full display with this idiot.

#23 | Posted by Enlightened at 2022-09-06 04:42 PM | Reply

Biden's America, you don't need to be convicted to be guilty.

#14 | Posted by visitor_

Trump's cult - attempting to overthrow democracy and replace it with fascism is patriotic.

#24 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2022-09-06 04:49 PM | Reply

What does a totalitarian state look like?

#10 | Posted by oneironaut

One where a leader declares any election that he loses to be fraudulent.

#25 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2022-09-06 04:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 8

One where a leader declares any election that he loses to be fraudulent.

#25 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Wow. ONERO walked right into that one. Someone get him a splint for his nose.

#26 | Posted by Zed at 2022-09-06 04:52 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

He was convicted of trespassing, which is almost never prosecuted if the person leaves on their own without having to be arrested. He was not convicted of insurrection. This Biden's Amerika. Police and judicial persecution based on political belief.

#27 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-06 05:03 PM | Reply

He was never tried for insurrection, hence he could not be guilty of it.

#28 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-06 05:05 PM | Reply

Y-A-W-N

#29 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-09-06 05:06 PM | Reply

I didn't see that when I read the article at the top of this page.
#13 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

That's weird since it's exactly where i found it.

Strange how your misunderstandings always seem to err on the side of Republican insurrectionists despite you allegedly being a Libertarian.

#30 | Posted by JOE at 2022-09-06 05:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

He's a Russian who makes $1000 a month posting c. 200 posts a day.

LOL no wonder they're always so angry they're dirt poor.

#31 | Posted by Tor at 2022-09-06 05:09 PM | Reply

He was convicted of trespassing, which is almost never prosecuted if the person leaves on their own without having to be arrested. He was not convicted of insurrection. This Biden's Amerika. Police and judicial persecution based on political belief.

#27 | Posted by visitor_

Tresspassing in order to acheive what goal? The overthrow of the government? What's another word for that?

Do you miss trump's america, where republicans could commit any crime without accountability?

#32 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2022-09-06 05:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Haha
Why would anyone who doesn't believe in governing apply for a job in the government
And what sort of dingdong voter casts a vote for them

Todays "conservatives" are too stupid for words

#33 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2022-09-06 05:19 PM | Reply

He was not convicted of insurrection.

#27 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-06 05:03 PM | Reply | Fla

Say you didn't read the article without saying you didn't read the article.

"Under New Mexico law, any private citizen of the state may file a lawsuit to remove a disqualified county official from office. A group of New Mexico residents were represented in this case by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and the New Mexico-based law firms of Freedman Boyd Hollander and Goldberg P.A, Dodd Law Office, LLC, and the Law Office of Amber Fayerberg, LLC, as well as by Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC."

#34 | Posted by Nixon at 2022-09-06 05:21 PM | Reply

Pisitor_ is a traitor to the United States of America. Period, full stop.

#35 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-09-06 05:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Why would anyone who doesn't believe in governing apply for a job in the government"

Occam's Razor says:
To destroy government.

This is the crime of malfeasance.

#36 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-06 05:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Crazy how all those tour guests keep getting oppressed. I mean, all they did was have a peaceful demonstration to overthrow democracy. It's not like anyone died or anything.

#37 | Posted by chuffy at 2022-09-06 05:49 PM | Reply

Biden's America, you don't need to be convicted to be guilty.
#14 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

It's not Biden's America it's Dark Brandon's America, comrade!
Comply or else!

#38 | Posted by a_monson at 2022-09-06 05:53 PM | Reply

@#27 ... He was convicted of trespassing, which is almost never prosecuted if the person leaves on their own ...

Really? Got a link to substantiate that?

#39 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-09-06 05:55 PM | Reply

#37 | POSTED BY CHUFFY

The DR's weekly reminder: Had Trump simply conceded the election, just like every other losing POTUS candidate in history, Ashli Babbitt would still be alive.

#40 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2022-09-06 06:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Yes I do it's called real life. Do you have a link that shows otherwise?

#41 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-06 06:15 PM | Reply

---- off, ------. Just ---- the hell off. You god-damned traitorous scum.

#42 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-09-06 06:18 PM | Reply

@#41 ... Do you have a link that shows otherwise? ...

I am not the one making the assertion.

So... you got nothin'?

#43 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-09-06 06:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Looks like an interesting Frontline on PBS this evening...

Lies, Politics and Democracy
www.pbs.org

...FRONTLINE's season premiere investigates American political leaders and choices they've made that have undermined and threatened democracy in the U.S.

In a two-hour documentary special premiering ahead of the 2022 midterms, FRONTLINE examines how officials fed the public lies about the 2020 presidential election and embraced rhetoric that led to political violence....


There's a link to view it in the article. The video is active now.

#44 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-09-06 06:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I told you my link is reality, do you have an alternate reality?

#45 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-06 07:23 PM | Reply

Certainly to be appealed, and probably reversed.

However, that does not condone what this POS actually believes, and why anyone would want him in the office of authority ANYWHERE is puzzling to me.

Straight up loser.

#46 | Posted by brass30 at 2022-09-06 07:27 PM | Reply

This Biden's Amerika.

Was the judge appointed by Biden, or instructed by Biden on what do to?

Maybe the judge ruled based on evidence and facts that a presidential election was never attempted to be overturned - and those associated with it should suffer the consequences (of like not holding public office of any kind).

Make sense to me.

#47 | Posted by brass30 at 2022-09-06 07:29 PM | Reply

He was convicted of trespassing, which is almost never prosecuted if the person leaves on their own

WTF....now you're writing law? LOL

Do us a favor, refrain from legal prose, please!

#48 | Posted by brass30 at 2022-09-06 07:36 PM | Reply

We have thugs in Portland occupying streets, never arrested, never charged, never convicted.

And you believe that if you call the police on a trespasser and he leaves on his own that police will arrest, prosecutor will charge, and judge will convict more often than not? Not in this country unless they're also one Joe's political opponents.

#49 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-06 07:47 PM | Reply

#49

You're grasping at straws, Fredo. Keep going. It's amusing watching you try to justify while twisting yourself into a pretzel.

#50 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2022-09-06 07:52 PM | Reply

well, there's this:

www.newsweek.com

#51 | Posted by brass30 at 2022-09-06 07:56 PM | Reply

#49

Only way for anyone to know he was a Biden political opponent would have been his insurrectionist behavior while trespassing at the Capitol along with other admitted seditionists.

Crucial context that you're conveniently ignoring.

Swallow it.

#52 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2022-09-06 08:03 PM | Reply

He was convicted of trespassing, which is almost never prosecuted if the person leaves on their own.

I. Stand. By. Every. Word. Of. It.

If you can dispute it, please do so. But you can't. Because if you could you would.

#53 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-06 08:04 PM | Reply

Just did, utilizing crucial context that which you ignore.

Move along, contrarian.

#54 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2022-09-06 08:07 PM | Reply

He was convicted of trespassing, which is almost never prosecuted if the person leaves on their own.

If I jump the fence at NASA, leave on my own but am caught on video......I'm a free bird? Even if I was say I wasn't doing anything wrong?

#55 | Posted by brass30 at 2022-09-06 08:07 PM | Reply

Ruh roh:

A government's military defenses, including its nuclear capabilities, was found by FBI agents who searched former president Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence and private club last month, according to people familiar with the matter, underscoring concerns among U.S. intelligence officials about classified material stashed in the Florida property.
www.washingtonpost.com

Why would Trump need such a document after losing the presidency? Why would he risk imprisonment for that?

#56 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2022-09-06 08:17 PM | Reply

"He was convicted of trespassing, which is almost never prosecuted if the person leaves on their own."

^
The nice Christian little old lady who kept hopping the fence at the nuclear missile site to protest nuclear weapons eventually got prison time.

#57 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-06 08:17 PM | Reply

"He was convicted of trespassing, which is almost never prosecuted if the person leaves on their own."

That.

That is beside the point, Visitor_.

His actions show he can't be trusted to keep his Oath of Office.

Do you agree, his actions show he can't be trusted to keep his Oath of Office?

#58 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-06 08:20 PM | Reply

If you can dispute it, please do so!

#59 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-06 08:25 PM | Reply

"A government's military defenses, including its nuclear capabilities, was found by FBI agents who searched former president Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence"

Holy ----.

Trump showed Putin the Big Board.

When will Republicans care?

#60 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-06 08:27 PM | Reply

He was convicted of trespassing, which is almost never prosecuted if the person leaves on their own.

I. Stand. By. Every. Word. Of. It.

If you can dispute it, please do so. But you can't. Because if you could you would.

#53 | Posted by visitor_

Why was he trespassing? For what purpose?

#61 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2022-09-06 08:41 PM | Reply

You should ask Kreskin that question. Joe has shown the Jan 6 protesters no mercy and spared no expense in investigating and prosecuting them to fullest extent allowed by law. All got was trespassing, a misdemeanor.

#62 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-06 09:03 PM | Reply

I've seen plenty of county and city officials removed without the need of a judge.

They just hold a special session and vote their ass out. It's the only way I've ever seen an elected public official be removed.

Either that's not an option in New Mexico or his brethren on the county commission supported him.

#63 | Posted by eberly at 2022-09-06 09:10 PM | Reply

You should ask Kreskin that question. Joe has shown the Jan 6 protesters no mercy and spared no expense in investigating and prosecuting them to fullest extent allowed by law. All got was trespassing, a misdemeanor.

#62 | Posted by visitor_

You don't have a theory? You can't make an educated guess why some trumper was in the capitol on 1/6? Are you dumb enough to think he just wanted to take a selfie in the rotunda, but fully respected the election results?

#64 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2022-09-06 09:12 PM | Reply

---- off, ------. Just ---- the hell off. You god-damned traitorous scum.

#42 | POSTED BY LEGALLALYBRAINDEAD

What an angry ---- for brains.

#65 | Posted by eberly at 2022-09-06 09:13 PM | Reply

If I offer an opinion you're not going to ask for a link to make me prove it are you?

#66 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-06 09:31 PM | Reply

"Joe has shown the Jan 6 protesters no mercy"

You voted for Trump?

Remember how Trump said protesters should be treated?

Protesters, LOL.

They were trying to overturn an election, and with it, our government.

#67 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-06 09:35 PM | Reply

If I offer an opinion you're not going to ask for a link to make me prove it are you?

#66 | Posted by visitor_

Why would you need a link for an opinion?

#68 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2022-09-06 09:38 PM | Reply

What an angry ---- for brains.
#65 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Couldn't help but notice you didn't say he's wrong.

Couldn't help but notice that, Eberly.

#69 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-06 09:46 PM | Reply

I believe he went to the Capital to protest the results of the election. I doubt that many thought that entering the Capital would have any effect other than disrupting and creating temporary delay in the confirmation. There may have been a delusional few that thought they could overturn the results. Most did not.

#70 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-06 09:54 PM | Reply

"I believe he went to the Capital to protest the results of the election."

Do you believe the goal of his protest was to overturn the election?

#71 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-06 09:56 PM | Reply

I believe he went to the Capital to protest the results of the election.

He explicitly encouraged violence you stupid lying ----.

#72 | Posted by JOE at 2022-09-06 10:00 PM | Reply

"I doubt that many thought that entering the Capital would have any effect other than disrupting and creating temporary delay in the confirmation."

So you agree that they sought to interfere with the Constitutional transfer of power.

Anyone who tried to do that cannot, by definition, support the Constitution.

Am I wrong?

#73 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-06 10:00 PM | Reply

Realisticly, I don't see how anyone could believe that the election could be overturned in this manner. I don't know if he was among the few that did.

#74 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-06 10:03 PM | Reply

But he tried.

He cannot by definition have allegiance to the Constitution after trying that.

You understand.

You know.

#75 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-06 10:04 PM | Reply

" I believe he went to the Capital to protest the results of the election."

Based on lies the liars knew were lies.

By that point, they'd lost over 60 cases, and produced ZERO evidence of fraud.

But they lied to you anyway. Because they wanted to keep grifting you and other supporters, and the truth would've ended their "fundraising".

#76 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-09-06 10:10 PM | Reply

There are differences in opinion on the meaning of and how to support the Constitution.

#77 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-06 10:14 PM | Reply

There are differences in opinion on the meaning of and how to support the Constitution.
#77 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

Such as?

You can try to impede the Constitution, but also support the Constitution?

???

#78 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-06 10:16 PM | Reply

Sure.

#79 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-06 10:32 PM | Reply

I believe he went to the Capital to protest the results of the election.

#70 | Posted by visitor_

He could have protested the results of the election on his front lawn.

He went to the capitol because a con man told him that was his last chance to OVERTURN the election. His last chance to STOP DEMOCRACY from working.

He went their with anti democratic, anti american goals.

#80 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2022-09-06 10:48 PM | Reply

Sure.

#79 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

Then your word as a man means nothing.

Find something in yourself to be proud of, Visitor_.

#81 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-06 10:52 PM | Reply

He could have protested from his lawn, he's also allowed to go to the Capitol and protest there too, with signs and blow horn.

What's he not allowed to do is trespass - "breaching and occupying" as the article indicates - that makes it a crime and that's exactly what he did. Acting like an idiot by climbing over walls - something he should NOT have done. And he was was found guilty by a fed judge. He'll probably get off easy. Sound familiar Visitor? Breaking the law and getting off easy. Hmmmmmm.

Now, the State of New Mexico took it a step further and that's there prerogative, perhaps even to make him an example for the stupid BS that he pulled in addition to showing no regret. He's a man in a very public and prominent position. Does he have the right to continue in his job? It's an interesting debate.

As anything, it can be appealed and surely will be.

#82 | Posted by brass30 at 2022-09-06 11:43 PM | Reply

It would also be interesting to know about the position this cowboy holds in New Mexico.

Subject to firing (ethics clause)? Only by voters (recall or election)?

What would usually happen - the person would step down. But not in today's politics....it's a badge of honor to be at the Capitol that day, huh?

#83 | Posted by brass30 at 2022-09-06 11:49 PM | Reply

This is not complicated.

The state district court judge lays out the basis of her ruling in a 49 page document. reason.com

Didja read it. If not then you should refrain from commenting.

That ruling addresses each and every, all and singular of the comments by the likes of bellringer, oneironaut and visitor.

Not saying the ruling is correct, just saying the judge contradicts their comments. Imagine that.

#84 | Posted by et_al at 2022-09-07 03:51 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Not saying the ruling is correct

Why aren't you saying that?

Do you have an opinion on whether the 14th Amendment bars the likes of Couy Griffin from holding public office?

#85 | Posted by JOE at 2022-09-07 06:41 AM | Reply

Realisticly, I don't see how anyone could believe that the election could be overturned in this manner. I don't know if he was among the few that did.

Better tell Eastman, Powell, Giuliani, Trump himself, all those in Congress that were attacked, those 140 Capitol Police officers suffering injuries and maiming, those police that died, all those fake electors, the Republicans in state after state, the Republicans that today are getting rid of Sec't of State powers and putting in myrmidon to carry out throwing the vote out at the local level refusing certification of the vote, - and on and on and on.

#86 | Posted by YAV at 2022-09-07 08:27 AM | Reply

Realisticly, I don't see how anyone could believe that the election could be overturned in this manner. I don't know if he was among the few that did.

"The Insurrection Index has 1,684 records of those in the public trust who played a role in the insurrection
193 Elected officials.
424 Organizations.
1,242 Individuals."

https://insurrectionindex.org

Yeah. How could anyone believe that!

#87 | Posted by YAV at 2022-09-07 08:47 AM | Reply

I guess hanging the VP before he can certify an election doesn't count.

#88 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-09-07 08:58 AM | Reply

Ridiculous on it's face to assert that everyone was of one mind and singular purpose. You have some evidence where the planning took place?

#89 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-07 09:12 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

"everyone" "or one mind"

---- off you dishonest sack.

#90 | Posted by YAV at 2022-09-07 09:18 AM | Reply

Surely there some evidence of this massive conspiracy. Now this guy, he was convicted of what now? Trespassing. New Mexico took away his right hold office for trespassing. Not criminal trespassing, not insurrection, not conspiracy of any kind. Trespassing.

#91 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-07 10:12 AM | Reply

More strawman -------- from Visitor. Always --------. Non-stop --------, lies, obfuscation, deliberate idiocy all to try and cloud the obvious.

"The Court's findings that Mr. Griffin engaged in repeated efforts to mobilize a mob and incite them to violence on January 6, 2021 amply support the Court's conclusion that he is unqualified under the Fourteenth Amendment to hold public office,"

That's the rulling. So what's this about the 14th amendment?

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, also known as the Disqualification Clause, bars any person from holding federal or state office who took an "oath ... to support the Constitution of the United States" as an "officer of any State" and then "engaged in insurrection or rebellion" or gave "aid or comfort" to insurrectionists. Griffin, as an Otero County Commissioner since January 2019, took an oath to "support and uphold the Constitution and laws of the State of New Mexico, and the Constitution of the United States."

It's crystal clear. You can't engage in insurrection or rebellion or give aid or comfort to insurrectionists without there being an insurrection.

It is a fact that we had an insurrection on January 6th.
It is a fact that Griffin was found guilty of engaging in or giving aid or comfort to those involved in that insurrection.
It is a fact that Griffin is now disqualified.

#92 | Posted by YAV at 2022-09-07 10:29 AM | Reply

Has anyone been charged and convicted of insurrection?
How can it be an insurrection without someone being convicted of insurrection?

#93 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-07 10:37 AM | Reply

"How can it be an insurrection without someone being convicted of insurrection?"

How could OJ have killed Ron and Nicole? He's not guilty.

You acknowledged he violated his Oath of Office.

That's enough to disqualify him from public office.

#94 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-07 10:39 AM | Reply

Has anyone been charged and convicted of insurrection?

Here's the semantic game you're playing: Insurrection is an event. The crimes charged are always in supporting the insurreciton. You don't get found guilty of "insurrection." It is not an "act." It is a thing. Hundreds have been found guilty of supporting the insurrection.

Let's explain further. There are several that have been charged with and found guilty of seditious conspiracy. The relevant term for this judgment is "sedition."

Here's the semantic game you're playing: Insurrection is an event. The crimes charged are always in supporting the insurreciton. You don't get found guilty of "insurrection." It is not an "act." It is a thing.

"Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

www.law.cornell.edu

You aren't found guilty of "insurrection." You get found guilty of inciting, kick-starting, assisting, engageing in "rebellion or insurrection"

You can be found guilty of sedition since that's an act.

#95 | Posted by YAV at 2022-09-07 11:10 AM | Reply

Has anyone been charged and convicted of sedition?
How can it be an insurrection without someone being convicted of sedition?

#96 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-07 11:39 AM | Reply

I did my own google, oddly enough only 2 convictions of seditious conspiracy. This guy wasn't either one of them.

#97 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-07 11:43 AM | Reply

I did my own google,
#97 | POSTED BY FREDO_

TMI, Fredo.

TMI.

#98 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-09-07 11:58 AM | Reply

Clownshart, why are you signing your posts as Fredo? We have not announced the results of the election.

#99 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-07 12:03 PM | Reply

why are you signing your posts as Fredo?
#99 | POSTED BY FREDO_

You must be confused as to how things work.

Real Fredo of you.

#100 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-09-07 12:07 PM | Reply

You're too dim to come up with your own meme. So there's that.

#101 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-07 12:15 PM | Reply

I did my own google, oddly enough only 2 convictions of seditious conspiracy. This guy wasn't either one of them.

Your point is so beyond irrelevant it is ridiculous. You are so abjectly ignorant of what the law is, the ruling is, the relevance of the facts used, and the result that you just look bad.

#102 | Posted by YAV at 2022-09-07 12:31 PM | Reply

#97 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

Where'd you get your law degree, junior? Out of a box of Cracker Jacks?

#103 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-09-07 01:29 PM | Reply

You're too dim to come up with your own meme. So there's that.
#101 | POSTED BY FREDO_

It seems you're too dim to know what a meme is.

Good job, Fredo.

#104 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-09-07 01:49 PM | Reply

Ridiculous on it's face to assert that everyone was of one mind and singular purpose. You have some evidence where the planning took place?

#89 | Posted by visitor_

Every single person at 1/6 was either a stupid sucker who bought the big lie, or a fascist who knew trump lost but wanted him to stay in power so badly they were willing to overthrow the government.

#105 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2022-09-07 06:46 PM | Reply

"You have some evidence where the planning took place?"

Preprinted T-Shirts
Willard Hotel Meeting
1/5 Texts

Need more?

#106 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-09-07 07:12 PM | Reply

"I did my own google, oddly enough only 2 convictions of seditious conspiracy. This guy wasn't either one of them."

Leader of North Carolina Chapter of Oath Keepers Pleads Guilty to Seditious Conspiracy and Obstruction of Congress for Efforts to Stop Transfer of Power Following 2020

Defendant is Third Member of Oath Keepers to Plead Guilty to Seditious Conspiracy Charge

www.justice.gov

#107 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2022-09-07 07:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If you do a 'find' search on this list, you will see 20 people have been charged with seditious conspiracy, 3 have plead guilty and as far as I can tell the other 17 haven't gone to trial yet:

The Capitol siege: The cases behind the biggest criminal investigation in U.S. history

www.npr.org

#108 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2022-09-07 07:43 PM | Reply

From the above link:

"In public comments and court documents, the Justice Department has roughly put the cases into three categories: those who conspired over days, weeks and even months to attack the Capitol; those who allegedly violently attacked police, often with the use of weapons; and the remainder who breached the building as part of the mob, but did not commit other crimes. Sixty defendants have been charged with conspiracy. At least 225 defendants have been charged with violence."

A number of defendants are charged with Conspiracy to Obstruct an Official Proceeding, for example, rather than with Seditious Conspiracy.

#109 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2022-09-07 07:48 PM | Reply

The Capitol siege: The cases behind the biggest criminal investigation in U.S. history. Biggest case of malicious prosecution too.

#110 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-09-08 03:08 AM | Reply

Lol

How convenient for your argument.

Swallow it.

#111 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2022-09-08 03:36 AM | Reply

Snoofy,

"You acknowledged he violated his Oath of Office.

That's enough to disqualify him from public office."

Scary the court of public opinion is offically setting precedent now.

#112 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-09-08 10:11 AM | Reply

Scary you can't read that it's not public opinion that found him guilty and kicked his ass off the ballot.

#113 | Posted by YAV at 2022-09-08 10:13 AM | Reply

Yav,

The judge enforced public opinion.

This was not truly an insurrection.

Won't get into conversation.

#114 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-09-08 10:33 AM | Reply

" Won't get into conversation."

you mean you can't back up your stubborn opinion.

#115 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-09-08 10:39 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Alex,

The core was lacking to make it a genuine insurrection.

On the surface by all appearances it looked like an insurrection.

Some people were more violent than others but most of them it was a show.

Just didn't have the heart to be a true insurrection where there would have been more bloodshed.

That's about as simple as I can explain my opinion.

That is it for me on this thread. I owe no one any further explanations.

#116 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-09-08 11:08 AM | Reply | Funny: 2

"This was not truly an insurrection."

Yes it was.

Definition of insurrection. : an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government.

#117 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-08 11:13 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

An insurrection doesn't require some certain amount of bloodshed, or any at all.

This one did have bloodshed and death, along with Fake Electors, Fake Ballots, a conspiracy among the Pres and his minions, and a violent riot to illegally disrupt the peaceful transfer of power.

#118 | Posted by Corky at 2022-09-08 11:27 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The judge enforced public opinion.

This was not truly an insurrection.

Won't get into conversation.

You aren't the least bit rational.

#119 | Posted by YAV at 2022-09-08 11:32 AM | Reply

"This was not truly an insurrection."

Humpty Dumpty strikes again.

Will you (at the least) admit it was an attempted insurrection?

And what about the attempts from those ALREADY INSIDE the Capitol when Trump began his speech? You know, the Josh Hawleys and Ted Cruzes of the world.

Was it okay for them to object to other states' already-certified results, while having ZERO evidence?

#120 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-09-08 11:40 AM | Reply

Snoofy,

If this had been a genuine insurrection there would have been more planning.

This was a mob but not an insurrection.

#121 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-09-08 04:57 PM | Reply

So I stand by what I said.

This judge enforced public opinion.

#122 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-09-08 05:03 PM | Reply

- there would have been more planning.

There was plenty of planning for the J6 insurrection...

www.cnn.com

www.npr.org

wisconsinexaminer.com

#123 | Posted by Corky at 2022-09-08 05:05 PM | Reply

If this had been a genuine insurrection there would have been more planning.

You say something and it's wrong, facts are presented, you come back with something else wrong, facts are presented...

Yet you can't figure out that your premise is the problem.

#124 | Posted by YAV at 2022-09-08 07:59 PM | Reply

"If this had been a genuine insurrection there would have been more planning."

Eastman Memo contained sufficient planning to overturn the election and with it our government.

Tell me I'm wrong.

Actually, go read the Eastman Memo then tell me I'm wrong.

#125 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-08 08:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#114 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

The "I've got nothing" defense.

Clown.

#126 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-09-08 08:29 PM | Reply

Agreed.

#127 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-09-08 08:46 PM | Reply

#121 - it was an insurrection, no doubt, no gray area, no ifs ands or buts. That's been proved repeatedly, over and over, again and again by the convictions for seditious conspiracy and rulings like this one.

This is black and white. It is simple. It is unambiguous.

#128 | Posted by YAV at 2022-09-08 09:57 PM | Reply

Follow-up to what I posted about a mob.

While I believe this was a mob and not an insurrection, that doesn't mean everyone who was there was part of the "mob". There were people there who may have been there or even went inside and not actually part of the "mob".

It boils down to intent. An individual may have entered the building illegally but even that doesn't make them participating in the "mob".

But calling this an insurrection, it wasn't that in my opinion.

#129 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-09-09 07:39 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

It was.

#130 | Posted by YAV at 2022-09-09 07:51 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 2022 World Readable

Drudge Retort