Posted on Jul 6, 2023
2
2
0
I was unaware of this history. I would have remembered if it had been on the news. The article in not long. It is clear and to the point.
What is important here: There is precedent . . .
Opinion: Why a Navajo leader’s conviction gives prosecutors a road map . . .
Opinion by Ken Ballen, Sat June 24, 2023
"Affirming MacDonald’s conviction, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that 'Section 371 (the conspiracy statue under which he was convicted) is a federal criminal statue of nationwide applicability, and therefore applies equally to everyone anywhere within the United States.' "
What is important here: There is precedent . . .
Opinion: Why a Navajo leader’s conviction gives prosecutors a road map . . .
Opinion by Ken Ballen, Sat June 24, 2023
"Affirming MacDonald’s conviction, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that 'Section 371 (the conspiracy statue under which he was convicted) is a federal criminal statue of nationwide applicability, and therefore applies equally to everyone anywhere within the United States.' "
Opinion: Why a Navajo leader’s conviction gives prosecutors a road map to take on Trump | CNN
Posted from cnn.com
Law
American History
Navajo Nation
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 4
1
1
0
The two situations are not at all the same, despite the author's fervent attempts to make them so.
So, no, there is NOT precedent.
If there were, the courts would honor, contrary to assertions others by those on the rabid left.
So, no, there is NOT precedent.
If there were, the courts would honor, contrary to assertions others by those on the rabid left.
(1)
(0)
(0)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
SGT Mary G. Well, first and foremost, Trump left on January 20. That alone is enough.
But Trump also was clearly speaking rhetorically when he was talking about fighting, as he always also said things like fight at the polls or demonstrate peacefully, whereas MacDonald was actually advocating - and coordinating - armed rebellion.
Finally, the Navajo insurrection aim was to take over government. January 6's aim was to take over... nothing.
But Trump also was clearly speaking rhetorically when he was talking about fighting, as he always also said things like fight at the polls or demonstrate peacefully, whereas MacDonald was actually advocating - and coordinating - armed rebellion.
Finally, the Navajo insurrection aim was to take over government. January 6's aim was to take over... nothing.
(2)
(0)
SGT Mary G.
SFC Casey O'Mally - We have a difference of opinion about that. I agree to amicably disagree.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
PO1 H Gene Lawrence
1SG Russell Scott - since I can’t comment on the below by Charlie Lee, I can on figure that he has me blocked. I would like him to tell the Biden administration the same thing.
(1)
(0)
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google