Facts start at the third section, "‘An issue of selective prosecution’", after ~30 paragraphs of character/story/emotion building.
> Mavalwalla was one of hundreds of people to respond to a 11 June social media post from the former president of the Spokane city council that encouraged protesters to block an Ice transport they believed would carry two Venezuelan immigrants who were in the country legally, petitioning for asylum when they were detained.
> “I am going to sit in front of the bus,” Ben Stuckart, the former city council president, wrote. “Feel free to join me.”
With this "problem" for the prosecutors quoted:
> In this case, prosecutors would just have to prove that defendants agreed in concert to impede or injure an officer.
Seeing, not just stuff like this, but a myriad of things, imo the US is cooked. EU countries that still have enlightenment ideals alive need to cut ties asap. In particular we need our own completely independent armies, arms production, and nuclear deterrence.
Imo what we're seeing in the US now is the visible "blooming" of things which have been growing and metastasizing since the 80's.
The complete lack of pushback from traditional conservatives against Trump's constant overreach and his complete disregard for basic civil liberties and the rule of law continues to shock me.
Stop being shocked, and start pushing back. Everyone is looking around for someone else to acknowledge that something is up (like a baby that just hit its head), and everyone needs to start crying.
People in the US do not have due process rights. I can confidently say this, because if anyone doesn't have due process rights, then no one has due process rights.
"Conspiracy to Impede or Injure Officers" seems like a pretty broad category, and should be separate things. Conspiracy to impede is one thing. That might be applied to planning to be at a protest where you may be in the way of an officer. Injuring is a very different thing. Conflating the two into a single charge seems disproportionate. This conflation seems intentional to give an excuse to just round up anyone who plans to be at a protest, and charge them with a crime that has a punishment equal to assaulting an officer.
This article is confusing. I think the actual charges are this:
> According to the indictment, Mavalwalla and his co-defendants “physically blocked the drive-way of the federal facility and/or physically pushed against officers despite orders to disperse and efforts to remove them from the property”.
And it was recorded and posted to Instagram:
> A one-minute video posted on Instagram shows the army veteran briefly jostle with an officer whose face is covered by a ski mask and sunglasses. Mavalwalla then locks arms with other demonstrators to block the gate.
Sidestepping the political hot topic, if you use Facebook to coordinate with others to block federal officers from doing their job and then someone from your group records it and posts it to Instagram, your lawyer is going to have a hard time finding a way out of charges like this.
I’m passively auditing articles and IG reports on federal arrest, indictment, protests, and military action on US citizens.
In this mode I’m asking myself, What’s being reported here. Is it same as previous stories or different?
This story features a citizen, participating in a protest. That’s not unusual. What is unusual is a federal arrest 30 days after the event.
I’m not saying this as fact of arrests (could be happening a lot for all I know), but only in terms of what is reported. And when you watch the videos of someone who gets in the face of law enforcement (I can’t see the video on the gift link, so I’m going by descriptions) invariably they are pulled offline and taken down by 4-6 police. Police are taking any physical interaction as assault and arresting people on the spot. (Maybe the police were overwhelmed or afraid this veteran would hurt them compared to the women I see shoved and dragged in IG videos).
Also, why 30 days later? The person who would have had the responsibility to arrest and charge resigned, and their replacement is reportedly unqualified?
As a citizen who has the right to protest (1st amendment), I’m not thinking that the government is taking names. Now I am, which is possibly the point.
AND! The president is calling for the end of No-Cash Bail. Do you see the chilling effect potential?
Not to mention the hypocrisy/asymmetry of January 6th as an event of obvious violent obstruction of federal procedure (every accusation is a confession). This arrest is notable in comparison to other reported arrests.
7 comments
[ 2.2 ms ] story [ 33.4 ms ] thread> Mavalwalla was one of hundreds of people to respond to a 11 June social media post from the former president of the Spokane city council that encouraged protesters to block an Ice transport they believed would carry two Venezuelan immigrants who were in the country legally, petitioning for asylum when they were detained.
> “I am going to sit in front of the bus,” Ben Stuckart, the former city council president, wrote. “Feel free to join me.”
With this "problem" for the prosecutors quoted:
> In this case, prosecutors would just have to prove that defendants agreed in concert to impede or injure an officer.
Imo what we're seeing in the US now is the visible "blooming" of things which have been growing and metastasizing since the 80's.
People in the US do not have due process rights. I can confidently say this, because if anyone doesn't have due process rights, then no one has due process rights.
> According to the indictment, Mavalwalla and his co-defendants “physically blocked the drive-way of the federal facility and/or physically pushed against officers despite orders to disperse and efforts to remove them from the property”.
And it was recorded and posted to Instagram:
> A one-minute video posted on Instagram shows the army veteran briefly jostle with an officer whose face is covered by a ski mask and sunglasses. Mavalwalla then locks arms with other demonstrators to block the gate.
Sidestepping the political hot topic, if you use Facebook to coordinate with others to block federal officers from doing their job and then someone from your group records it and posts it to Instagram, your lawyer is going to have a hard time finding a way out of charges like this.
In this mode I’m asking myself, What’s being reported here. Is it same as previous stories or different?
This story features a citizen, participating in a protest. That’s not unusual. What is unusual is a federal arrest 30 days after the event.
I’m not saying this as fact of arrests (could be happening a lot for all I know), but only in terms of what is reported. And when you watch the videos of someone who gets in the face of law enforcement (I can’t see the video on the gift link, so I’m going by descriptions) invariably they are pulled offline and taken down by 4-6 police. Police are taking any physical interaction as assault and arresting people on the spot. (Maybe the police were overwhelmed or afraid this veteran would hurt them compared to the women I see shoved and dragged in IG videos).
Also, why 30 days later? The person who would have had the responsibility to arrest and charge resigned, and their replacement is reportedly unqualified?
As a citizen who has the right to protest (1st amendment), I’m not thinking that the government is taking names. Now I am, which is possibly the point.
AND! The president is calling for the end of No-Cash Bail. Do you see the chilling effect potential?
Not to mention the hypocrisy/asymmetry of January 6th as an event of obvious violent obstruction of federal procedure (every accusation is a confession). This arrest is notable in comparison to other reported arrests.