I stipulate that judges have discretion in sentencing and don't have to go along with the prosecution's recommendation. That being said ,Justice Tanya Chutkan's sentence of Matthew Mazzocco is an unjust poltically motivated travesty that violates the spirit of the 8th amendment .


Mazzocco plead guilty to “parading, demonstrating, or picketing” in the Capitol without authorization during the Jan. 6 riot..... a misdemeanor charge Prosecution recommended 3 months of home confinement .Chutkan imposed a 45 day jail sentence.

Is he a threat ? Does he have priors ? No . The FBI statement indicates that he was trying to be a calming influence urging others to not take or destroy anything .

In her comments she revealed that her decision was a political one . She justified the Floyd riots of the summer of 2020(“People gathered all over the country last year to protest the violent murder by the police of an unarmed man—some of those protests became violent,” ) but suggested that the Jan 6 riot was an attempted insurrection (not true) and that was his reason for participating . .....“to compare the actions of people protesting mostly peacefully for civil rights to those of a violent mob seeking to overthrow the lawfully elected government is a false equivalency and ignores the very real danger that the Jan. 6 riot posed to the foundation of our democracy.”

Such rhetoric is ok for political debates on discussion forums . But to use such over the top CNN parroting pabulum as justification for excessively harsh sentencing reeks of political prosecution and a show trial worthy of a scene from Alice in Wonderland .

Quote:

---

In here comments she revealed that her decision was a political one . She justified the Floyd riots of the summer of 2020(“People gathered all over the country last year to protest the violent murder by the police of an unarmed man—some of those protests became violent,” ) but suggested that the Jan 6 riot was an attempted insurrection (not true) and that was his reason for participating . .....“to compare the actions of people protesting mostly peacefully for civil rights to those of a violent mob seeking to overthrow the lawfully elected government is a false equivalency and ignores the very real danger that the Jan. 6 riot posed to the foundation of our democracy.”

---

Conveniently overlooked was the fact that those, "people protesting mostly peacefully for civil rights," burned dozens of buildings, destroyed tens of millions of dollars of private and public property, and advocated for violent behavior, frequently in support of a narrative that turned out to be a false one.

Mazzocco was inside the Capitol for a whole 12 minutes long enough to take a selfie . What a threat to the Republic !!

Contrast the sentence he received with Judge Trevor McFadden, who questioned Friday why prosecutors had not brought more cases against those who had taken part in the Floyd protests and said the DOJ “would have more credibility if it was even-handed in its concern about riots and mobs in this city.”
He gave Danielle Doyle probation after prosecutors recommended home confinement .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

In her comments she revealed that her decision was a political one ...... but suggested that the Jan 6 riot was an attempted insurrection (not true)

---

You claim the insurrection was not an insurrection. How would you describe an armed attempt to take over the Capitol in order to invalidate the election of a US president and restore the defeated candidate under the banner of confederate battle flags (previous insurrectionists) and loudly threatening death to the sitting vice-president of the United States? What would you call that - a tea party?

Quote:

---

....“to compare the actions of people protesting mostly peacefully for civil rights to those of a violent mob seeking to overthrow the lawfully elected government is a false equivalency and ignores the very real danger that the Jan. 6 riot posed to the foundation of our democracy.”

---

This is hardly rhetoric or CNN pablum. It perfectly describes the facts of the event as witnessed by the whole world.

Quote:

---

You claim the insurrection was not an insurrection. How would you describe an armed attempt to take over the Capitol in order to invalidate the election of a US president and restore the defeated candidate under the banner of confederate battle flags (previous insurrectionists) and loudly threatening death to the sitting vice-president of the United States? What would you call that - a tea party?

---

Nothing more than shrill, overly-excited rhetoric. There is no evidence for any of that. There was no threat at all to the foundation of the republic. Silliness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

There was no threat at all to the foundation of the republic. Silliness.

---

Surely you jest! As Athos said:
"...an armed attempt to take over the Capitol in order to invalidate the election of a US president and restore the defeated candidate under the banner of confederate battle flags (previous insurrectionists) and loudly threatening death to the sitting vice-president of the United States..."

armed attempt ??? They tried to "overthrow" the government with flag poles and selfie cameras as the weapon of choice. The only firearm discharged was used by an overzealous Capital Police Officer who shot an unarmed woman protester point blank . By all means if you have proof of a protester using a weapon then charge them as such.

"As Athos said." Is that supposed to lend credibility?

There was no armed attempt to do anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

armed attempt ??? They tried to "overthrow" the government with flag poles and selfie cameras as the weapon of choice. The only firearm discharged was used by an overzealous Capital Police Officer who shot an unarmed woman protester point blank . By all means if you have proof of a protester using a weapon then charge them as such.

---

Plus they (respectfully?) pooped and peed on walls and floors. And how many firearms were brought in with threatening shouts to kill government people (who were rushed to safety in the basement)? Oh, yeah, the invaders were just excited tourists taking pictures -- and damaging property (in private offices and other off-limits areas).

Quote:

---

And how many fireAnd how many firearms were btought in with threatening shouts to kill government people (who were rushed to safety in the basement)?arms were btought in with threatening shouts to kill government people (who were rushed to safety in the basement)?

---

I don't know. How many? And remember that "Athos said" is not documentation.

Pooped and peed on walls amounts to an insurrection? On what planet? "Put Trump back in office or I'll pee on the walls!! I mean business, mister!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I don't know. How many? And remember that "Athos said" is not documentation.

---

Watch the many videos. Look at the weapons being carried in as walls are scaled and windows smashed. Didja see the guy trashing Pelosi's office? Didja see the Capitol guards hustling US workers to the basement? Didja hear the raucous shouts? Would you want those guys storming YOUR house?

Quote:

---

Pooped and peed on walls amounts to an insurrection?

---

Read my above comment. What if they had been "lib dems"?

After your predictable non-answer, I can only repeat my question.

I don't know. How many? And remember that "Athos said" is not documentation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

After your predictable non-answer, I can only repeat my question.

I don't know. How many? And remember that "Athos said" is not documentation.

---

Watch the videos!!!!

If you start the personal bashing, I'm done here.

"Watch the videos" is not an answer to the question.

Quote:

---

I don't know. How many?

---

If you don't want to discuss this with me, then why did you start the discussion? I'm fine with ending it if that's what you want, but when you give those non-answers, I'm going to point that out. It's not "personal bashing". It's just the truth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

"Watch the videos" is not an answer to the question.

If you don't want to discuss this with me, then why did you start the discussion? I'm fine with ending it if that's what you want, but when you give those non-answers, I'm going to point that out. It's not "personal bashing". It's just the truth.

---

Okay. I'm done. And I thought it was going along quite nicely.

Quote:

---

threatening shouts to kill government people

---

got me . If the DOJ has that evidence they should use it against the people charged . To my knowledge no one as yet has been charged with 18 U.S.C. § 875, 18 U.S.C. § 876 or other statutes related .

So no shooting, evidently no firearms, and evidently no threats to kill people? Those people need to learn a few things about how to run a good insurrection! Peeing on a wall is pretty lame.

They shouldn't have done what they did. I think everyone agrees with that, but to run around making shrill, false claims doesn't advance the narrative at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

armed attempt ??? They tried to "overthrow" the government with flag poles and selfie cameras as the weapon of choice. The only firearm discharged was used by an overzealous Capital Police Officer who shot an unarmed woman protester point blank . By all means if you have proof of a protester using a weapon then charge them as such.

---

Let me get this straight. Are you saying this was NOT an insurrection? They were NOT trying to invalidate the presidential election and replace the winner with the loser? They were NOT calling to "Hang Mike Pence"? Are you saying that armed requires a gun? What about a pole used as a cudgel in an attempt to beat someone to death? Is your objection based on nothing more than syntax?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

got me . If the DOJ has that evidence they should use it against the people charged . To my knowledge no one as yet has been charged with 18 U.S.C. § 875, 18 U.S.C. § 876 or other statutes related .

---

The investigation is ongoing.

An 18 year old shoots up his classroom in Texas. Several people are hit by gunfire. He is assessed 75K in bail AND RELEASED. Many people are being held without bail in Washington for, in many cases, trespassing. The lesson is clear. Don’t mess with the liberal dem wing of the fed gov. I’ll bet the kid in Texas is very thankful he didn’t pee on a wall. He’d be in jail for years for that!

January 6 Rioters are being held in jail in horrible conditions . That is a fact . Federal Judge Royce Lamberth has ordered a prisoner , Christopher Worrell ,who has cancer ,released so he can start chemo treatment . He said that the conditions in the jail were “deplorable” and “beyond belief”.

400 prisoners are to be moved out of a DC jail where water to cells gets shut off for several days for punitive reasons ....where clogged toilets don't get addressed ... and prisoners who had been pepper sprayed were not permitted to wash it off for several days ;leading to infections . Staffers at the jail threatened prisoners to not cooperate with the Marshal Service when they did an investigation .The Marshal Service reports that food service is inadequate with food being served cold and congealed .
Lamberth has referred the jail to the DOJ for violating Christopher Worrell's civil rights . The judge also held both Warden Wanda Patten and Department of Corrections Director Quincy Booth in civil contempt last month for failing to turn over Worrell’s medical records. Worrell has non- Hodgkin's lymphoma . He also has a broken finger that went unattended that may require surgery .

Furious Judge Finds D.C. Jail Officials in Contempt for ‘Abuse’ of Jan. 6 Prisoner Christopher Worrell (thedailybeast.com)