Viewing profile — mycodendral

Look up camping EDM festivals.

It's giving ensloppification

In this case conspiracy is using communication to coordinate illegal impediment.

Insurrection is a choice with consequences

Ah yes, the typical language of peaceful protestors

Are you capable of accurately describing the other sides argument?

Trump’s speech does not meet that standard. It lacked coordination, targeting, or intent to physically interfere. The Minnesota case is different because it includes coordinated di…

"molest, interrupt, hinder, or impede him in the discharge of his official duties" The explicit coordination of things like: vehicle blocking, personnel blocking, personnel removal…

The statute defines a crime that is distinguishable from peaceful protest/1A. You are free to interpret that however you like in relation to what is occurring.

Yes, they are federal officers. There is no pattern of mass kidnappings by impersonators occurring here. Interpreting masked officers in tactical gear as kidnappers, or claiming th…

This statute defines the conditions where free speech transitions to criminal activity. You can interpret it however you like.

18 U.S.C. § 372 - Conspiring to impede or interfere with a federal officer

18 U.S.C. § 372 - Conspiring to impede or interfere with a federal officer Freedom of expression does not include freedom from prosecution for real crimes.

Federal felony, not free speech. 18 U.S.C. § 372 - Conspiring to impede or interfere with a federal officer

18 U.S.C. § 372 — Conspiracy to impede or injure officer If two or more persons in any State, Territory, Possession, or District conspire to prevent, by force, intimidation, or thr…

you have a more direct way?

the value is the directness, not implied origination not everyone cares about playing voldemort

It’s incoherent if you value rule of law, markets, property, rights, or stability. If you’re willing to abandon all that over your police grievance, then sure, it’s coherent as ana…

I don't need to prove that FBI investigations are crime-related. That's the presumed norm, not a claim requiring evidence. If you claim otherwise, the burden of proof is on you.

Sure, that works. Wasn't my original point, but it's more related to our recent discussion, and I don't think either of us disagree with that. I'd say yours is: This isn't a crimin…

Ok. If you want to continue, then summarize my argument effectively and I'll let you know if you've got it right or wrong.

This is getting ridiculous. > ‘I'm not doubting that they are acting in their official capacity; obviously they're conducting a "criminal investigation" insofar as they are a crime…

Ok, so you want to rewrite the existing legal force framework. Again, good luck with that. Folks who argue this rarely provide a coherent alternative that holds up to scrutiny. > ‘…