-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Consequences for Veterans and/or retirees in the 2021 DC Riots
- Thread starter Sam I am
- Start date
I posted earlier.. One of the rioters identified is an attorney who was fired from his job after being identified.
What are the odds that someone files a bar grievance? Lawyers are temporarily suspended or permanently disbarred every month in my state (Florida) for doing really stupid things.
Last edited:
I don’t know how this plays into it in the decision making...
There’s a natural tendency to see this as party versus party, red versus blue. But really what happened here was Executive versus Legislative. Article I versus Article II. A fight between two co-equal branches of our federal government, launched and applauded by the executive branch leader. This is right at the very core of our Constitution, our form of government.
They could have just as easily been sent to interfere with a Supreme Court proceeding. Imagine that, busting into the Supreme Court with body armor and flex cuffs.
It seems to have stepped beyond just politics or mere criminal breaking and entering. This is bigger. A vet’s participation seems bigger. JMO
There’s a natural tendency to see this as party versus party, red versus blue. But really what happened here was Executive versus Legislative. Article I versus Article II. A fight between two co-equal branches of our federal government, launched and applauded by the executive branch leader. This is right at the very core of our Constitution, our form of government.
They could have just as easily been sent to interfere with a Supreme Court proceeding. Imagine that, busting into the Supreme Court with body armor and flex cuffs.
It seems to have stepped beyond just politics or mere criminal breaking and entering. This is bigger. A vet’s participation seems bigger. JMO
Question: do they really need to be called back to active duty? The link @VMO4 posted sounds like it's got it covered...
(C)
section 2381 (treason), 2382 (misprision of treason), 2383 (rebellion or insurrection), 2384 (seditious conspiracy), 2385 (advocating overthrow of government), 2387 (activities affecting armed forces generally), 2388 (activities affecting armed forces during war), 2389 (recruiting for service against United States), or 2390 (enlistment to serve against United States), of chapter 115 (relating to treason, sedition, and subversive activities) of title 18;
Like someone said earlier, words matter, and what the powers that be ultimately define this event as could carry major significance.
Another interesting fact that pops up a lot with subsequent terminations of employment for stuff like this (and one I've exercised myself as an employer) is that a lot of these folks think they're protected by the constitution to basically do whatever the heck they want. Specifically in most cases the 1st amendment to free speech since a lot of the controversy around terminations involves written or spoken statements. BUT, that's not the case. The first amendment protects your right to free speech from the government, but not your employer. They're genuinely shocked that their employer can an may terminate their employment for facebook content and/or videos of spoken statement or unlawful acts.
(C)
section 2381 (treason), 2382 (misprision of treason), 2383 (rebellion or insurrection), 2384 (seditious conspiracy), 2385 (advocating overthrow of government), 2387 (activities affecting armed forces generally), 2388 (activities affecting armed forces during war), 2389 (recruiting for service against United States), or 2390 (enlistment to serve against United States), of chapter 115 (relating to treason, sedition, and subversive activities) of title 18;
Like someone said earlier, words matter, and what the powers that be ultimately define this event as could carry major significance.
Another interesting fact that pops up a lot with subsequent terminations of employment for stuff like this (and one I've exercised myself as an employer) is that a lot of these folks think they're protected by the constitution to basically do whatever the heck they want. Specifically in most cases the 1st amendment to free speech since a lot of the controversy around terminations involves written or spoken statements. BUT, that's not the case. The first amendment protects your right to free speech from the government, but not your employer. They're genuinely shocked that their employer can an may terminate their employment for facebook content and/or videos of spoken statement or unlawful acts.
Sam I am...bringing people together. It's what I do.
VMO4
Well-Known Member
I am licensed in Florida, and any felony conviction is automatically reviewed by the Bar. Felonies involving breach of the peace, or dishonesty, (theft) will usually result in suspension or disbarment (five years, reapply for admission, take bar exam again), felonies like substance abuse will get you on "pee probation" etc.. Florida is more strict with discipline that most states, but a felony breach of the peace will probably get your ticket pulled, a misdemeanor, probably not, and yes, anybody can fly a complaint.
The problem here is that it is being defined by the same people that defined last summer’s riots as mostly peaceful protests.
The irony here is that if you consider the number of pro Trump protesters in DC, this could be called that too.
This talk of over throwing the government is BS. There may have been a few with that idea but the it was a protest of what to they considered to be a corrupt election full of voter fraud. It was a protest calling for Congress to overturn the election results. It was not an armed rebellion against the United States.
But of course the Trump hating Dems are saying it was sedition by those evil deplorable Trump supporters whereas last summer’s violence, destruction and looting were mostly peaceful and justifiable protests.
The hypocrisy is obvious but not surprising since the Dems have spent the last 4 years trying to overturn an election themselves.
You are on to something here. There is an intentional see-saw tension between the executive and legislative that has been subjugated and deformed by Social Media. Now I can spend all day long reading how angry someone in California is wildly angry at a legislator from Texas. They rant, they rave, but they are powerless because their legislative (representation) vote reaches no further than their political district. That lack of power leads to a ill-defined “community” willing to force change.
Now, I want to be perfectly clear here, I see almost ZERO difference between the mobs that ravaged cities this summer and the mob that ravaged the Capital Building last week. They both had defined political goals but no actual way to make it happen peacefully. The things that drive people to this kind of desperate action are many. The USAF guy is hardly the first commissioned officer to assume his government had turned on him, his family, and “the people.”
The real question is how do we stop this? Clearly Social Media companies have to be reeled in. They have crossed a line (used by both sides) and are now active participant with unchecked power. Should they be regulated as journalistic activities? Next is education. I haven’t taught in a college classroom in about two or three years, but I was gobsmacked at the absolute lack of a basic civics education for all of my undergrads and most of the graduate students. Perhaps we are in need of a new “renaissance” that brings back fundamental education well before we teach nebulous, philosophical, ideas.
My analysis after all of this is that the republic will be fine. Democracy will dust this off like a bit of dandruff on a shoulder. I don’t think, however, that the two party system will make it. There are significant fissures in both standing parties that will break in time.
What is fact is that the rampaging crowd was part of a multi-pronged effort launched by the executive branch (and a bunch of legislators) to delay or flat-out stop the constitutionally mandated process of certifying the election. Even during the riot, while the congress-peeps ( senators and reps) were holed up in their respective bunkers, pressure was being put on them via phone from POTUS to stall the count.
I disagree HAL. If they'd stayed outside, it's a protest. When they swarmed the capitol, chased the legislative body from their chambers, killed a police officer with a fire extinguisher, and raided the offices of legislators it became something else. Rebellion seems to fit pretty well.
The hard part is that in a mob people will do things they might not ordinarily do.
I’d say any agitators would be the ones really guil.
The Karen screaming up front at the cops that she’s there to kill Pelosi would qualify.
The doofus filming the video Brett posted is more there for shits and giggles than really pushing for anything.
And the few guys you can see trying to reason with the cops, organize and keep the mob from getting fully violent are hardly rebellious.
The dummies chanting to execute Pence are likely deluded into thinking they were fulfilling the wishes of the Commander in Chief and that they are his militia. Deluded, but in their mind probably not rebellious intent - and the product of having zero understanding of civics.
Yup. There must be accountability.
Why is this important? It doesn’t change their actions. Should it change how they are punished? I think it shouldn’t.
FWIW, where things escalated beyond peaceful and into criminal activity over the summer, I supported legal consequences as well. I don’t care what your political positions are, violence and destruction in pursuit of a political goal is... there’s a word for that... what was it again?
Depends what you're asking.
If you're thinking I believe lack of civics knowledge excuses their behavior, I don't.
The ones chanting "Hang Pence" - I find them absolutely repulsive, mobs are fickle and they may as well be chanting "Hang Trump" next and I consider them to be treasonous pieces of shit.
The only point I'm making there is that in their mind, they probably thought they were following the orders of the CinC which might lead a defense that they thought they were following legitimate orders. Which I think might change something as far as intent ie knowingly in a rebellion vs being a fucking moron.
I walked in from a flight and someone in the squadron told me that protestors in DC had broken into the Capitol building. I thought "oh shit!" and pictured a swam of organized people with AR15s infiltrating the building. I pictured a Rebellion. Of course once I saw the pictures and videos, it was clear my imagination over-estimated the situation. You're right that this was "something else," but "Rebellion" is a stretch. They had no plans or capability to hold the building. There was no shoot out. They need to be hung out to dry, but maybe sometimes a bunch of unorganized, opportunistic assholes is just that.
On the other hand, I'm not sure the Sons of Liberty at the Boston Tea Party had a long-term strategy, so maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm underestimating these assholes at the Capitol.