Do you consider most of those arrested and still held from January 6th to be political prisoners?

[Anonymous]

Yes

No

[ObscuredBeyond]

They couldn't even be bothered to limit the list to only those who were present on the street causing mischief of any kind. They simply took a list of names from nearby hotels, and randomly rounded up random names, and tossed them in jail.

To this day, some of those randoms have no clue what they're even being charged with.

They still have no lawyer, no court date, have been denied the right to a fair and speedy trial, are denied exercise, are denied food except for water and soy (i. e., POISONED), are denied the ability to use the shelves in their own cells, are beaten if they attempt to exercise in their cells, are denied toilet paper, are denied changes of underwear, are denied medical care, are denied family contact, etc.

You'd get treated more humanely than that in a prison in the Philippines!!!

Brandon is openly violating every single law on the books; sacrificing these souls on the altar of his couldn't-possibly-be-more-false narrative, bitter-clinging to the chance to pretend he has an ounce of legitimacy.

Which just got blown to bits, as recent evidence shows that Joe personally saw to the rigging of the election in Pennsylvania. But Stupid Cute Ass and others on this site still swear by every letter of the "official" narrative!

The level of rejection of plain reality going on is beyond demonic!

[exitseven]

They are held without bail and the explanation is that they were insurrectionists while people who burn courthouses, police cars and businessess continue to roam free., It is total BS. They are being held for having an opposing political view. These people were protesting the theft of a presidential election. every single person that was in DC that day is under investigation by the FBI. The guy in the buffalo suit was given 4 years in prison for basically trespassing. It is Biden's way of silencing dissenters plain and simple.,

[exitseven]

Thanks for the MHO

[Curiousgirl2414]

I listened to a great podcast the other day titled “White Flag.” It’s hosted by Joe Walsh, a conservative former congressman, and he made a great point.

Throughout 2020, during the riots in Portland, Kenosha, and elsewhere, President Trump was calling for a law that would require any individual who destroyed government property to be imprisoned for a minimum of 10 years. He said that he tweeted about it quite a few times.

By that standard, shouldn’t the January 6th prisoners who broke windows and stole property from the capitol building have another 9 1/2 months to serve?

[Asker]

Don't listen to that idiot. He sucks. He calls himself a Catholic as he is divorced and married to a divorced woman, a double whammy.

[Curiousgirl2414]

Cool.

[Avicenna]

there at least three problems with that line of thinking:

1) It's the law in effect at the time of any incidents that determines any penalties, and the executive order you reference applied to federal MONUMENTS and wouldn't have been applicable.
2) Leftists who attacked the ICE building in Portland (for example) certainly didn't get punished like that (if any got punished at all).
3) Merely trespassing after a masked man or Capitol Police waved you in is not "destroying government property"

Walsh actually endorsed Biden in 2020, so he's obviously not a conservative any more.

The allegations concerning the treatment of the jan. 6 protestors in DC jails is what's most concerning as regarding their status as political prisoners. The term is apt because of the way leftists have been treated by Democratic prosecutors (very differently), even if the allegations of mistreatment in the DC jails are not accurate.

[Curiousgirl2414]

Guys, it’s a podcast where you can listen to 2 people at the opposite end of the spectrum kindly and respectfully talk about their differences and try to find common ground on policy and issues, something incredibly rare these days. If you’re not about it because the host isn’t super catholic enough for you or he doesn’t fit your political narrative, then don’t listen to it.

[Avicenna]

Given that Walsh is anti-Trump, did he have on someone who was pro-Trump, or was this two people who hate Trump talking to each other?

[Curiousgirl2414]

The beautiful thing is, at least the 4 episodes I’ve listened to, is it’s rarely, rarely about trump. If it was, I wouldn’t listen to it. Why?

I don’t care about Trump. I am not Anti-Trump. I am not Pro-Trump. My policy beliefs or my identity are not defined by one man or one politician or one party. Couldn’t care less, and unfortunately, 99% of the media we have now is either a gigantic circle jerk to Trump’s amazingness or a nonstop bitch fest about Trump’s terribleness, like a rant about an ex girlfriend. Trump has 0 bearing on my life, and the “issue” and the person is boring.

What’s interesting? Fred Gutenberg, a man whose teenage daughter was killed in the FL Parkland school shooting, a massive gun control advocate, having a discussion with a staunch pro second amendment, zero gun control conservative with a collection of guns. Radically disagreed, yet they sat back, heard each other out, and had dialogue about an issue that actually matters, and even found reforms that they each could live with.

You most likely won’t agree with this, and wouldn’t enjoy the discussion I’m referencing. I’m cool with that and respect that Trump is your top tier and perhaps only issue. If it is, then no, the 4 episodes I’ve listened to did not include “pro-Trump” guests, but it wouldn’t have mattered because that wasn’t the issue they talked about.

[Avicenna]

Unfortunately, people who are anti-Trump generally don't care about the treatment, detention without bail and prosecution those arrested for Jan. 6th. That means a discussion between two people who are anti-Trump ON THIS TOPIC is not going to between two people who are from the opposite spectrum on this issue. That means it's completely relevant where they stand.

You haven't addressed the issues I brought up. And don't assume what I'd like or don't like.

[bolverk]

And if reports are to be believed they have been detained in conditions that you would not be allowed to keep a Prisoner of War.

[MountAverage]

Well, you could argue that as domestic terrorists they could be considered political prisoners. But usually the term refers to people being imprisoned simply for politcal activity, so by that definition they're not.

[Kaneki05]

All terrorists from political reasoning that are arrested are so I guess so yeah.

[Armourdillo]

They visited laws and broke in to a building they were not allowed in to at that time, they aren't being prosecuted for thinking the election is rigged.

[Wester1967]

republicans are always in to playing victim these days

[ObscuredBeyond]

Let's deny you the right to be formally charged with a specific crime. Let's deny you food except for soy. Let's deny you medical care, exercise, family contact, a court date, a trial, a lawyer, etc. And when you bitch, we'll say you're just "playing" victim.

Get your head out of Pooh's ass!

[IncognitoBandito]

I consider them dupes and idiots who are best kept safely locked away.

[ObscuredBeyond]

How is being tortured, and denied contact with family, a "safe" locking away? When they're denied medical care as well, what's "safe" about that? Even Gitmo prisoners, who've murdered millions, get healthcare. But these who haven't even been formally charged with a specific crime yet, who killed no one, who were merely THERE, are denied even basic medical treatment, and that's okay?

Pretty sick thinking, if you ask me.

[EnglishEuropean]

Not unless you consider breaking and entering a valid political process.

[jshm2]

Nope. just incompetent terrorists.

[msc545]

No, just stupid terrorists.

[OddBeMe]

no they're prisoner prisoners.

[Anonymous]

No, just locked up clowns.