Fogbow

The times he blew the whistle in someone's ear would be sufficient grounds for arrest, I think. The video shows him closely behind a woman who is covering her ear.

Tiredretiredlawyer wrote: ↑Sat Mar 25, 2023 8:52 am The times he blew the whistle in someone's ear would be sufficient grounds for arrest, I think. The video shows him closely behind a woman who is covering her ear.

On what charge?

I don't know where to put this, but such a thing of beauty is worth a share.

If you listened to Republicans this morning, you'd think they slept through the Trump years.

Secretary Blinken was before
@HouseForeign
today. I took the chance to correct the record. Turns out the Trump Administration left quite a mess for him to clean up.

Take a look

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Sat Mar 25, 2023 10:31 am

Tiredretiredlawyer wrote: ↑Sat Mar 25, 2023 8:52 am The times he blew the whistle in someone's ear would be sufficient grounds for arrest, I think. The video shows him closely behind a woman who is covering her ear.

On what charge?

IANAL, but that action might be considered assault. Assault does not require physical contact.

Again, not being a lawyer, my understanding is that assault is defined as something like this: anything that will make a reasonable person fear for his/her safety, taking into account the time, place and circumstances.

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Sat Mar 25, 2023 10:31 am

Tiredretiredlawyer wrote: ↑Sat Mar 25, 2023 8:52 am The times he blew the whistle in someone's ear would be sufficient grounds for arrest, I think. The video shows him closely behind a woman who is covering her ear.

On what charge?

Battery aka the other kind of assault. Exposure to loud noises cause damage and can be painful. There have been battery charges based on sound, light, etc., because the attacker is intentionally focusing high energy onto a victim.

Other possible charges could be more generic disturbing the peace and possibly decibel-level violation.

The anti-abortion protesters with their bullhorns have resulted in the almost impossibility of charging anyone with a noise-related complaint any more without using a calibrated decibel meter.

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Sat Mar 25, 2023 1:52 pm The anti-abortion protesters with their bullhorns have resulted in the almost impossibility of charging anyone with a noise-related complaint any more without using a calibrated decibel meter.

I agree that a conviction for a decibel-related complaint likely wouldn't stick without a meter.

But an arrest? Just to get the person out of the area? Probably would (after spending tens of thousands to argue qualified immunity).

The larger point is that battery doesn't require touching. Injury can be inflicted "invisibly" by sound, light, temperature, etc.

Tiredretiredlawyer wrote: ↑Sat Mar 25, 2023 8:52 am The times he blew the whistle in someone's ear would be sufficient grounds for arrest, I think. The video shows him closely behind a woman who is covering her ear.

Fwiw - Marge’s post suggested that the “brave” woman chose to position herself in front of the whistleblower.
If true - surely that argues against his “assault”

Kendra wrote: ↑Sat Mar 25, 2023 11:31 am I don't know where to put this, but such a thing of beauty is worth a share.

Bravo, Sec. Blinken! Thank you so much for sharing Kendra.

"Lions and tigers and bears!!! Oh, my!

I wonder if Secretary Blinken had a heads up to play along, or was he just quick on his feet?

Cross posting.

NEW: A trio of
@HouseGOP
committee chairs say the House could soon take up legislation to strip state and local prosecutors of the authority to prosecute former presidents in response to the potential indictment of former president Donald Trump.

Rex Donnie super lege

Will they specify that it only applies to former GOP presidents?

Slim Cognito wrote: ↑Sat Mar 25, 2023 9:10 pm Will they specify that it only applies to former GOP presidents?

Those are the only ones that are actual criminals, so probably.

Kendra wrote: ↑Sat Mar 25, 2023 8:10 pm

NEW: A trio of
@HouseGOP
committee chairs say the House could soon take up legislation to strip state and local prosecutors of the authority to prosecute former presidents in response to the potential indictment of former president Donald Trump.

Even if it could get past the Senate - which I doubt - no way Joe signs it, and no way they could override his veto, right?

Prognosis: silent death in the committee. Will never see the light of day on the floor of the House. These clowns cannot get together any legally sound phrases to fulfill their intent.

Good thing for them they only care about making noise and not actually governoring. The intended audience will also not notice when nothing happens with their proposal.

But, but, I thought they were AGAINST weaponizing the government.

Tiredretiredlawyer wrote: ↑Sun Mar 26, 2023 11:05 am But, but, I thought they were AGAINST weaponizing the government.

Not when it comes to oppressing their enemies....

JAKE TAPPER: Are you arguing that people who commit business crimes aren't committing crimes?

COMER: We're talking about a federal election crime

TAPPER: My understanding is that he's being investigated for falsifying business records

(This interview did not go well for Comer)

Kriselda Gray wrote: ↑Sat Mar 25, 2023 10:24 pm

Kendra wrote: ↑Sat Mar 25, 2023 8:10 pm

NEW: A trio of
@HouseGOP
committee chairs say the House could soon take up legislation to strip state and local prosecutors of the authority to prosecute former presidents in response to the potential indictment of former president Donald Trump.

Even if it could get past the Senate - which I doubt - no way Joe signs it, and no way they could override his veto, right?

Even if passed, which it won't, it would never survive a court challenge. I know these knutsacs think that if the Tenth Amendment was a real part of the Constitution that mattered, it would be in the Second Amendment, but this is just too flagrant. And if they don't know that, they have no business being in Congress to begin with.

Not a serious attempt to pass a law, just a bid to get a soundbite on Fox News.

Kriselda Gray wrote: ↑Sat Mar 25, 2023 10:24 pm Even if it could get past the Senate - which I doubt - no way Joe signs it, and no way they could override his veto, right?

Yup.

Also likely unconstitutional, as police powers are quintessential state (not federal) level functions. Further evidence that states' rights/limited government are just lip service.

This is just political theater.