neogodless 5 days ago
  • mycodendral 5 days ago

    18 U.S.C. § 372 - Conspiring to impede or interfere with a federal officer

    Freedom of expression does not include freedom from prosecution for real crimes.

    • germinalphrase 5 days ago

      “ If two or more persons in any State, Territory, Possession, or District conspire to prevent, by force, intimidation, or threat, any person from accepting or holding any office, trust, or place of confidence under the United States, or from discharging any duties thereof, or to induce by like means any officer of the United States to leave the place, where his duties as an officer are required to be performed, or to injure him in his person or property on account of his lawful discharge of the duties of his office, or while engaged in the lawful discharge thereof, or to injure his property so as to molest, interrupt, hinder, or impede him in the discharge of his official duties, each of such persons shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six years, or both”

      • direwolf20 4 days ago

        Interesting. Donald Trump would be a criminal under this rule because Jan6.

        • mycodendral 4 days ago

          Trump’s speech does not meet that standard. It lacked coordination, targeting, or intent to physically interfere. The Minnesota case is different because it includes coordinated dispatch, targeting of ICE activity, and sharing de-arrest material with the stated intent to impede operations. That coordination and intent is the legal difference.

    • nkohari 5 days ago

      You keep commenting to cite this statute when you clearly have not actually read what it says. Peaceful protest is explicitly protected by the first amendment.

      • mycodendral 5 days ago

        The statute defines a crime that is distinguishable from peaceful protest/1A. You are free to interpret that however you like in relation to what is occurring.

  • zahlman 5 days ago

    [flagged]

    • neogodless 4 days ago

      We are referring to peaceful protest and assembly, which are protected rights, not crimes. You can have a huge group chat or take out a huge billboard and announce your protest. There's no crime to discuss here.

      • zahlman 4 days ago

        You can refer to what you like, but we have seen the actions of protesters thus far on video.

JKCalhoun 5 days ago

Interesting that there would be people on a "side" that think there was a conspiracy to commit a crime. What crime?

  • rexpop 5 days ago

    It's a crime.

    What do you have against crime?

    Nonviolent political action is often criminalized.

  • mycodendral 5 days ago

    18 U.S.C. § 372 - Conspiring to impede or interfere with a federal officer

    • baerrie 5 days ago

      This refers to physical impediments. Spreading legal information is not an impediment, it is free speech. If all info could be interpreted as impediments to federal officers then phones, the internet, the human voice, etc would be illegal

      • zahlman 5 days ago

        > This refers to physical impediments. Spreading legal information is not an impediment, it is free speech.

        Yes, but physical impediments are physical impediments. The protesters have been repeatedly seen to impede, or attempt to impede, ICE physically.

      • mycodendral 4 days ago

        In this case conspiracy is using communication to coordinate illegal impediment.

  • mindslight 5 days ago

    In the fascist's mind, anything that isn't supporting Dear Leader's vision of "greatness" is a crime.

  • PrettiGoodDead 5 days ago

    [flagged]

    • mrtesthah 5 days ago

      We already know that "doxxing" on its own is not a crime, and moreover that [non-undercover] federal agents are not entitled to keep their identities secret.

      We also know that legal observation and making noise does not constitute interference.

      So those may be their stated reasons, but they will not hold up in court.