The Department of Justice Poses Grave Danger to the First Amendment

The Department of Justice is threatening the First Amendment rights of six protesters arrested during a protest, on Inauguration Day last year.

DOJ is making the most insane argument that protesters and journalists should go to jail

The Department of Justice Poses Grave Danger to the First Amendment

The Department of Justice is threatening the First Amendment rights of six protesters arrested during a protest, on Inauguration Day last year. The six protesters were protesting against incoming Pres. Donald Trump, which is perfectly understandable for any reasonable person. This attempt by the DOJ to convict six protesters, some of them journalists, poses a grave danger to future protests and the First Amendment six rights of free speech if they succeed in their ridiculous quest to put away since people for expressing their displeasure against Donald Trump.

Leading the US government’s case representing the Department of Justice is Assistant US Attorney Rizwan Qureshi offered no arguments that the defendants had committed any type of violence or destroyed property. Instead, he likened them to “getaway drivers” at a robbery, which is nothing less than a huge stretch of one’s imagination. In this so-called “arguments”, Qureshi makes reference to a “sea of black” because many of the protesters were wearing black. However, he doesn’t specify whether any of these defendants themselves were wearing black. He presented absolutely no evidence that they have committed any other crime than being part of a crowd where many people were wearing black. Qureshi is suggesting that these defendants acted as some type of “shield” for other protesters who may have committed a crime. Thus, the “getaway car” analogy.

Even though he offers no arguments saying that these six defendants, he still try to have them sent to jail for committing a crime. A person should only be sent to prison if they actually committed a crime. In this case, the DOJ offers no evidence proving that these defendants were guilty of any wrongdoing or crime. This begs the very obvious question, “why does the Department of Justice, a branch of the US government, want to put these people away?

The answer should be very obvious. The US government, in this case, the Department of Justice, wants to scare people into submission, no matter what reckless policy or injustice a person may be protesting against. With this ridiculous case, it is very obvious that the DOJ is making this a test case to see what they can get away with, especially silencing dissent in the United States.

This entire case by the Department of Justice also proves to be a great irony, albeit a bitter irony. Why doesn’t the DOJ get so bent out of shape when members of the Tea Party, and other advocates of the Second Amendment, show up at a public event like a town hall meeting openly wearing firearms? After all, it is illegal to openly carry a weapon in a public place.

Where is the Department of Justice, who are supposed to be the guardians and protectors of the U.S. Constitution with these lawbreakers, openly carrying firearms in their attempt to squelch the First Amendment rights of those people who may disagree with them? If this isn’t selective law enforcement, I have never seen it.

This entire case is nothing but bullshit and I strongly suspect that Department of Justice knows it.

 

Senator Jeff Sessions Unfit to Be US Attorney General

Senator Jeff Sessions Unfit to Be US Attorney General One of the most controversial nominations made by President-elect Donald Trump is his nomination of Jeff Sessions to be US Attorney General.  Senator Sessions has nothing in his record that shows him as having what it takes to be head of the …
United States Department of Justice

The United States Department of Justice (DOJ), also known as the Justice Department, is a federal executive department of the U.S. government, responsible

 

Jeff Sessions Voting Record shows Him Unfit to be US Attorney General

Jeff sessions voting record clearly shows that he is unfit to be US Attorney General.

Jeff Sessions Voting Record Shows Him Unfit to be US Attorney General

Jeff Sessions voting record clearly shows that he is unfit to be US Attorney General. It demonstrates that he cannot be unbiased enough to make the necessary decisions that will face him. Donald Trump should never have designated him as the US Attorney General nominee. As head of the Department of Justice, the various positions he has taken over the years shows he will be incapable of being fair and unbiased; something that is crucial for a good US Attorney General.

A few examples of Jeff Sessions voting record that could prevent him from being unbiased are his stance on marijuana, women’s rights, and LGBTQ rights. These are crucial issues that he will probably face if we are unlucky enough to have him as US Attorney General.

Jeff Sessions is against marijuana and thinks it’s dangerous, even though several states have legalized it. Advocates for marijuana legalization are afraid that Jeff Sessions will use his position as US Attorney General to go after and prosecute people involved in the marijuana industry, even though it may be illegal. This stance could bring about another controversial “states rights” issue. A “states rights” issue is one where a state maintains it has the to legislate a particular state instead of the federal government.

When it comes to women’s rights, Jeff Sessions is very much against abortion rights and has said that he doesn’t think that grouping a woman’s genitals are what he considers to be sexual assault. Apparently, he shares the opinions of Donald Trump, the person who chose him to be the US Attorney General nominee.

Since sexual assault is becoming an increasingly serious subject, is this the stance we want to see from a person who is going to be the head of the Justice Departme and nt? I think not!

Jeff Sessions voting record on LGBTQ rights are equally offensive to anyone who considers himself to be a civil libertarian, as I do. He is very anti-gay marriage and voted against ending the military’s “don’t ask don’t tell” policy about gay and lesbian soldiers. Since many issues are constantly arising that involve gay rights, Jeff Sessions, if he becomes US Attorney General probably will not be one who is capable of making the necessary unbiased decisions when it comes to ensuring the rights of members of the LGBTQ community.

These are just three areas that show Jeff Sessions to be unfit as the US Attorney General nominee, let alone US Attorney General if he is confirmed.

 

Trump offers Jeff Sessions US Attorney General job | AL.com

Nov 18, 2016 Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., has been offered the Cabinet post of attorney general by President-elect Donald Trump, according to a report by …
Would Special Education Rights Be Safe With Jeff Sessions As U.S. …

Nov 29, 2016 Comments from Jeff Sessions, tapped for U.S. Attorney General, about special education worry education and disability advocates.