175 points

I’m surprised the judge didn’t yank him back on that statement as proof that he lied to the court and give him a longer term

permalink
report
reply
32 points

He’d need to be tried again for purgory which he very well might be

permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points

I don’t think he was under oath at the time he made that statement, so perjury is not a concern.

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

That’s not how it works. His statement out of court can be used as evidence that his statements in court were false (perjury).

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

So he didn’t commit pierogi

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

What if he literally vomited on them? He purged all over the court

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

But an outburst in court can be considered contempt. The judge could have marched him back in for that one but it probably would have been seen as petty.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Lol purgatory might be in his future anyway

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I read that as purgatory at first and got a little confused

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I doubt it’d be worth it to pursue. He could always argue he was changed at the time he said it but in between then and now, he changed his mind back.

permalink
report
parent
reply
149 points

They need the max sentence, every time. None of them are sorry; they’re just telling the judge what they think he wants to hear. They might as well not be sorry making license plates for a decade.

permalink
report
reply
79 points

they’re sorry they failed. Sorry they got caught, and sorry they’re being held accountable.

what they’re not sorry about is trying to fucking overthrow the lawful government of this country. So yeah.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Nobody’s talking about mandatory minimum sentencing. I do agree with you BTW.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

“I’ve learned my lesson, judge.”

“It’s a trick. Get an axe.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

The judge can call a hearing based on his actions, and re-sentence him. It’s already happened to at least one of these chucklefucks

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Do you have a source for this? Not that I don’t trust you, I just want to laugh at these chucklefucks.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-64 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
44 points

Sending people to jail for decades: the new charade.
-by your local tinfoil hat

permalink
report
parent
reply
-22 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

Oh boy.

What charade is that?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-19 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
116 points

Hopefully the prosecution saves this video and presents it at this douchebag’s first, second, nth, parole hearing.

permalink
report
reply
38 points

Federal, so he has to serve 1/3 of his sentence to get to his first parole consideration. So, a little over three years.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

No need. The judge will take this personally, and call another hearing to re-sentence him. This has already happened to at least one of these chucklefucks

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Oh, really? Somehow I missed that. That’s very encouraging.

permalink
report
parent
reply
103 points
*

I feel like immediately showing that you lied to the judge should allow for revising your sentence.

ETA: It amuses me to think about this chud feeling like a badass with his act of defiance in the court room. Later, he has the “oh shit,” realization when he arrives at his cell.

permalink
report
reply
71 points

I hope this stunt is used to deny him parole every time he asks.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

Dude is resting easy thinking that he’ll be pardoned on Jan 21, 2025. That’s the only reality that has any hope for him.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Lol you think Trump is going to remember these people?

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Definitely not. He only remembers people who have some sort of leverage on him, like Roger Stone and Michael Flynn.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Trump doesn’t even remember people he actually worked with.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

If Trump wins, pardoning these people will be his first order of business. That signals to his supporters that he wants them to do it again but in greater numbers to keep him in power indefinitely.

permalink
report
parent
reply
82 points

Of course he’s a changed man. Before he was free, now he’s going to prison. I hope all these Proud Boys are similarly changed!

permalink
report
reply
19 points

It’s a whole lifestyle makeover! 😆

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 13K

    Posts

  • 388K

    Comments