It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


18 U.S. Code § 2101. Lock them up !

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 1 2020 @ 12:32 AM
Many of us remember the 234 cretins arrested after the Trump inauguration in Washington DC 2017. Some were facing up to 70 years in prison but most of them got off Scott free. Only a handful pled guilty and received any punishment . Which was a slap on the wrist anyway .

That outcome was the result of overcharging the defendants. Even though indictments were passed on by the grand jury. The trials of the initial group resulted in not guilty verdictd because the government was not able to prove the individuals committed the specific crime they were charged with. I assume that was because of the black uniforms mask they dawned exactly for that reason.

Barr plans a workaround which many of us called for in the first place.

That is 18 U.S. Code § 2101.

(a) Whoever travels in interstate or foreign commerce or uses any facility of interstate or foreign commerce, including, but not limited to, the mail, telegraph, telephone, radio, or television, with intent—

The charging elements are sweeping and the net it cast’s is broad.

(4) to aid or abet any person in inciting or participating in or carrying on a riot or committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot;
and who

“Any person” those two words are the power behind the law.

(2) has use of or used any facility of interstate or foreign commerce, including but not limited to, mail, telegraph, telephone, radio, or television, to communicate with or broadcast to any person

If attorney general William Barr follows through with his vow to prosecute “organizers “that crossed or communicated over state lines. Know what hit them until they hear someone yelling federal agent and pounding on their door.

Not only could a few bodies end up in jail. But it’s going to take a big chunk out of their arsenal.

Social media !

An organization (ANTIFA) without communication doesn’t stay organized for long.

If you look at the statue “organizing” can be interpreted as a conversation with as little as two people engaging in interstate communication with the intent to commit violence .

Specific identities for acts committed in the turmoil of a riot won’t need to be established. That was the failure of law-enforcement in 2017. This go around the rioters have already told on theirselves . Bragging and taunting on social media will bite them in the ass hard.

Each incident is a separately chargeable event. While I seriously doubt the DOJ will enhance the charges over and over they could if they wanted to.

Here’s the bad news......

(c) A judgment of conviction or acquittal on the merits under the laws of any State shall be a bar to any prosecution hereunder for the same act or acts.

A sympathetic mayor or prosecutor could get ahead of the feds offering sweet deals for guilty pleas. Which would bar federal prosecution.

But on the other hand the statue call’s for.

the Attorney General with authority to act, any person shall have violated this chapter, the Department shall proceed as speedily as possible with a prosecution of such person

I’ve never seen that in a statute before. But this is a 1968 law made with the intention of breaking up the riots that plagued us that decade.

I can only assume that is speeding up the process so that the government could make a example as quickly as possible. More or less show them a scalp as a deterrent. Telling the rioters play time id over here comes the loooong overdue consequences.

Title 18 US code 2101

Last and least the ninth district court of appeals stuck their nose in the statute. In a recent ruling they overturned a case finding first amendment violations.

Here’s the pertinent part of the courts decision.

Returning back to the statute, however, there is a problem. The Anti-Riot Act has no imminence requirement. The Anti-Riot does not require that advocacy be directed toward inciting or producing imminent lawless action. It criminalizes advocacy even where violence or lawless action is not imminent. And in doing so, the Anti-Riot Act eviscerates Brandenburg’s protections of speech.

9th Districk

Barr seems to have attempted to close that loophole with specific wording in a charging document.

”It is a federal crime to cross state lines or to use interstate facilities to incite or participate in violent rioting,” he said. “We will enforce these laws.”

He’s going for the ripe fruit.


posted on Jun, 1 2020 @ 05:37 AM
Actually those cases were dropped because it came out that this administration collaborated with Project Veritas to introduce false and doctored evidence.

On top of that it would be completely impossible for the arrested (which included journalists who were reporting on the events) to be guilty of the crimes of which they were accused.

I mean they were already trapped in the Cauldron by the time the property destruction started blocks away.

This was a clear cut case of the government arresting people for the unspeakable act of protesting the President.

The fact that people on this site still act like the arrests were a righteous act after everything that has come out about them is disgusting.

posted on Jun, 1 2020 @ 07:02 AM
In only a few short years...criminal Terrorist Money Monger methods built up and supported over several hundred years have been permanently disenfranchised.Its already done.....these are death throes....and that is the sequence the Head of the Snake uses...they criminalise regular people tactically...then they coerce them into acts of Domestic Terrorism....then they collect the money that these actions generate for them.

The layers are being removed completely one by one by one in a methodical nonstop consistent constant expeditious manner....and shall continue.

posted on Jun, 1 2020 @ 10:36 AM
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Actually those cases were dropped because it came out that this administration collaborated with Project Veritas to introduce false and doctored evidence.

Never heard of that could you point me in the right direction for verification ?

new topics

top topics

log in