General Question

seawulf575's avatar

Should this senator be arrested?

Asked by seawulf575 (13301points) 1 month ago

The Democrat Senator from New Hampshire made a statement which (a) Coercion with threats of violence to the Supreme Court ahead of one of their cases and (b) urges insurrection. This is far more obvious and definitive than anything Trump is accused of doing. Both of these actions are criminal. Should the DOJ take action to arrest this
Senator? Should the Senate at least censure her?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

57 Answers

Smashley's avatar

Seems to fall directly in the “people are saying” category. Pretty typical hyperbole for this day in age, with enough verbal cover to make it legal.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

In your opinion !

seawulf575's avatar

@Smashley that might be. But let’s play a what-if. What if the SCOTUS overturns Roe v Wade and then violence breaks out. This senator was saying (in an official statement) there could be revolution and voila! there is violence against the government because of that ruling. That qualifies as a call for insurrection, doesn’t it? It is far more blatant that what everyone is trying to say Trump did.

filmfann's avatar

I disagree with your characterization. Trump said much worse.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

Trump tried to overthrow the government on January 6th.

I know he failed but he tried to.

Where is the centrist Senator overthrowing the government ?

‘Revolution’ means voting all the fascist GOP out of office.

chyna's avatar

Except for the names and a few other changes, the story is the same as Jan. 6th.
So if the senator should be arrested, so should trump.

elbanditoroso's avatar

Sure, because she had the temerity to speak up. And of course, she is a democrat.

If she were a republican, I imagine that she would be hailed (by some) as a patriot.

jca2's avatar

Trump repeatedly stated that the election was stolen and all that other stuff. He still says it now. If anybody deserves the handcuffs, it’s the DJTrumper.

rockfan's avatar

@chyna

Were you parodying Neil Diamond’s “I Am I Said” in your answer? Funny coincidence if you weren’t.

Irukandji's avatar

Senator Shaheen made a prediction: if X happens, then Y will happen. She didn’t say it should happen, she didn’t say she hoped it would happen, and she didn’t encourage anyone to make it happen. And that’s before you get into the ambiguity of what kind of revolution she is predicting (since major shifts in political winds are also called “revolutions,” such as the Republican Revolution of 1994).

If she constructs an elaborate lie in order to create a permission structure for violence, then I’d happily get on board with censuring her. If the violence then occurs, I’d happily get on board with removing her from office. But making political predictions isn’t a crime.

chyna's avatar

@rockfan I was! Thanks for noticing.

product's avatar

The absurdity of a question like this should be accompanied by clown music.

seawulf575's avatar

@Tropical_Willie I’ve read the transcript of Trump’s speech…have you? Or do you only hear the slant from CNN? Nothing in there like “There will be revolution!”. And to say “well, she meant it this way” is disingenuous. You read into whatever you want when it is a Repub but make excuses like crazy when it is blatant from a Dem.

LostInParadise's avatar

He did not threaten any violence. He just predicted that there would be violence. He may be right. In any case, he is entitled to his opinion of what will happen.

seawulf575's avatar

h@jca2 Saying the election was stolen is not a call for insurrection. Saying there will be revolution, is. “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. ” That is a quote from Trump when he is supposedly urging an overthrow of the government. Does that sound like a call for insurrection?

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: Offering one quote from Trump is not the entirety of the crap he’s said since the election.

seawulf575's avatar

@chyna “Except for the names and a few other changes, the story is the same as Jan. 6th.
So if the senator should be arrested, so should trump.” and by the same logic, if Trump should be called up for inciting violence, then so should this Senator. So you would be in favor of some sort of punishment for her? Especially if RvW gets overturned and there is violence?

chyna's avatar

^Actually, I don’t care anymore. I wish people would just do their jobs they are hired for and mind their own business. If the people I work with came in on a daily basis and called people names, or called out their backgrounds, ethnicity, religion, etc, like most of these politicians do, they would be fired.
Again, just do what you were hired or elected to do, and this country would be better off.

Forever_Free's avatar

I would say no, considering the lack of any action on prior statements made by political figures.
On what grounds would you arrest/censure her?

Dutchess_III's avatar

All she was saying is that there will be massive protests if Roe v Wade is overturned. I agree.

flutherother's avatar

Jeanne Shaheen is an American senator, speaking up for the people she represents. Trump is an undemocratic loser who brought his nasty riffraff followers to the Capitol to try to undermine the smooth transition of government.
One is American democracy in action, the other is the ugly head of fascism.

Dutchess_III's avatar

^^^ Amen!!!

Forever_Free's avatar

@flutherother Well said! She is my state senator and while I don’t always see eye to eye with her, she is well within her bounds to speak up on this as she has done.

Zaku's avatar

@seawulf575 ” Saying there will be revolution, is [a call for insurrection.]”
– No, it is not.

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
seawulf575's avatar

@chyna I have to give you a GA for that. I’m pretty much fed up with DC politics too. It has spilled over to state and local as well.

seawulf575's avatar

@Zaku so Trump saying he will fight the outcome of the election IS a call for insurrection? Your logic is extremely strange.

Zaku's avatar

@seawulf575 No. You’re suggesting my “logic” is something that I didn’t write at all, and AFAIK no one is saying.

I quoted one line from you which was utter nonsense, and said no to it.

Consider: “If Justin Trudeau bans maple syrup in Canada, there will be a revolution!” – is that me calling for an insurrection in Canada?

MrGrimm888's avatar

Perhaps the most important question is, should politicians be investigated, before being handed such power over those they leech from?.......
It took me a few weeks of background checking, just to get a part-time job delivering for a national pizza franchise once…
Less than I had to go through, than getting a firearms sales certificate, or get a jobs in law enforcement.

American politicians, are probably ALL hiding some of the rocks they stepped on, on the way up…..But. As long as the sheep follow, the shepherd will likely stay fat and warm…...

seawulf575's avatar

@Zaku You are not a major public figure. But let’s say you were and you wrote that and then Trudeau banned maple syrup in Canada. And then there was an uprising. Aren’t you responsible because you put the idea in their heads?

That is the logic being used against Trump. Because he said they needed to fight to defend their rights, the left is going crazy saying he incited violence. He said it in a context of legal fights, but the violence is being blamed on him. The plan against Trump is to say he called for insurrection. That’s the whole point of the Jan 6th commission.

So the question remains: Should this Senator be arrested (which is what they want to do with Trump) or censured or some other punishment for stating that there will be a revolution if the SCOTUS rules a certain way? And I notice no one is really addressing the idea of a public figure trying to coerce a decision from a federal jurist (or panel of them) by threat of force.

seawulf575's avatar

@MrGrimm888 Hello! I haven’t seen you in a while. Glad to see you again. I just gave you a GA for that one. It is probably the best answer on this thread so far! Though to be fair, @chyna had a really good one as well.

Zaku's avatar

@seawulf575 No, because it was just a prediction based on my understanding of Canadians. I didn’t invent Canadians liking maple syrup. My prediction turned out to be correct, but I wasn’t doing anything other than making that prediction.

MrGrimm888's avatar

Gladf to see you as well sailor. I guess I’m back. And unfortunately, you still only see through a red lense…

You are smarter, than this question would imply and what the sheep hear when they listen to Trump…

Giving your wisdom the respect it reserves, is difficult following some of your own declarations and poorly veiled blindness of the dribble about/from the GOP.

If you want to insist upon bull’s fecal matter fed to you from the right, that’s your business.
However. I have PM’d you enough, to believe that you are above what is pretty much trolling the leftists here.

As you probably recall. I have no loyalty for either party.

Instead. I would prefer to see your perception reflect that of the true wolf you are, rather than this tired “baaaaaad” sheep routine.
With all due respect sir….

seawulf575's avatar

@Zaku But put yourself in the public eye. Let’s say a Canadian Senator wrote that if Trudeau banned maple syrup there would be a revolution. And there was following his action to ban maple syrup. By the logic used in THIS country, by the left, that Senator, if he/she was right leaning, would be guilty of inciting an insurrection. Look at Donald Trump for the example of this. IF, however, the senator was from the left it would then be defended and ignored as being irrelevant. Look at the response on this page for the example of this.

Dutchess_III's avatar

She never suggested there would be a revolution.

seawulf575's avatar

@Dutchess_III from the article I cited:
”“I hope the Supreme Court is listening to the people of the United States because – to go back to Adam Sexton’s question – I think if you want to see a revolution go ahead, outlaw Roe v. Wade and see what the response is of the public, particularly young people,” Shaheen said toward the end of the event. “Because I think that will not be acceptable to young women or young men.””

Sounds like she exactly said there would be a revolution.

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: Is she calling for a revolution? Is she saying “rise up, take to the streets and overthrow the government?” No.

Zaku's avatar

@seawulf575 But that’s also not true. You’re arguing for a ridiculous false equivalency, on so many different levels, none of which deserve the effort of spelling out to you how ridiculous they are.

While it is true that Trump has been irresponsibly and idiotically saying many different types of atrocious comments for years, which has encouraged various unhinged people in many terrible ways, Trump’s role in the January 6th insurrection went far beyond making a predictive statement.

Forever_Free's avatar

Do people just not realize that when people make false statements there is a Lunatic Fringe of people out there that believe it.

Lunatic Fringe definition: : the members of a usually political or social movement espousing extreme, eccentric, or fanatical views.

Senator Shaheen’s statement is nowhere near this.

seawulf575's avatar

@zaku so is it your belief that unhinged people are only on the right? That there are no unhinged people on the left?

seawulf575's avatar

@Forever_Free it is every bit, and possibly more, incendiary as anything Trump said on Jan 6th. Trump specifically said “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” That is calling or a peaceful protest…not inciting a riot or calling for insurrection. Stating there will be “a revolution” is the same as the code the left always says Trump uses to cue in his followers. And be honest…the left has produced far more violence and destruction in their protests than the right ever has. They are just looking for a reason to create mayhem.

Zaku's avatar

@seawulf575 No, that’s not my belief.

seawulf575's avatar

@Zaku so if you acknowledge that there are unhinged leftists, why can you not admit this could be inflammatory to them? If the SCOTUS rules in favor of Mississippi they could easily take this statement as a call for revolution.

Zaku's avatar

@seawulf575 Why are you trolling so hard?

Oh right, you’re reading Yahoo! News and skimming for anything to distract from or confuse the issue of how Trump lied his ass off about voter fraud, hired lawyers to lie their asses off about voter fraud, got caught on tape trying to commit voter fraud himself, formed groups of conspirators to try to overturn the election results in any way they could think of, including a violent attack on the Capitol and potentially killing legislators and his own vice president. And you’d also like to distract attention from how almost every current Republican in the Federal legislature is siding with Trump, and also ignoring even what the majority of Republican voters want on every popular voting measure, going as far as to excessively filibuster and risk the US defaulting on its debts.

So it’s not that I’m not “admitting” there could be unhinged leftists somewhere that are going to call for revolution only because they read that stupid Yahoo! News article reporting about one senator saying that might happen. But that’s one of the most pathetic cases of the “whataboutism” disease I’ve ever heard of! That senator is correct that more than half the country would be very pissed off at such a ruling, and might be correct that some sort of “revolution” (probably millions of pink hats will be worn in public), but that’s just one senator talking about it, not causing it by any stretch of the imagination.

And that’s WAY more breath/typing and attention that that deserves, not to mention the rest of your posts on this troll-tastic thread. If you want to compare it to Trump, compare it to one of his thousands upon thousands of inflammatory BS statements, but not to creating a lie that the election was rigged and then trying to actually overthrow the election and incite a deadly attack on the Capitol!

How about you explain why you’re not a traitor for trying to help Trump get away with it?

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
seawulf575's avatar

@zaku You don’t like that I found an article about a Dem senator calling for a revolution if the SCOTUS votes in favor of Mississippi, yet you will believe a CNN or MSNBC article that Trump incited a riot when he specifically called for a peaceful protest.

Zaku's avatar

@seawulf575 Wrong again.

jca2's avatar

Again, @seawulf575, you provide one quote, one example, of all the things he has said since he lost the election.

seawulf575's avatar

@jca2 Yet it was that one speech that the Dems/Left are using to say he incited the “insurrection” on Jan 6th. That is the whole crux of their claim…that he told “his people” to fight. So now you are saying it doesn’t matter? Well if it doesn’t matter, then what is all the hoopla about the Jan 6th commission about?

See, there are a ton of things that happen in this world. And it was the left that latched onto that speech to claim he urged the violence. In their minds that was how it happened. But now you have another politician, giving the left the cue that if things in the SCOTUS don’t go their way, they should revolt. So when this ton of things happens, we look for similarities and differences to start digging into what our standards are. Here we have two identical situations (identical for all intents and purposes) and we are treating them differently. We have two politicians that used language that could be construed as urging violence. Yet on one hand you believe it is true and on the other you don’t. Why is that? Because one was Trump and the other was a Democrat? That is about the only difference.

So I will just ask you to consider, if the SCOTUS rules in favor of Mississippi and violence starts, that it was Sen Shaheen that urged it and prompted it.

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: Not similar. She didn’t say “should.” This has been reviewed thoroughly with you. I’m sure you are a reasonably intelligent person but you are acting obtuse for the sake of argument.

Response moderated (Writing Standards)
seawulf575's avatar

@jca2 So if someone nutty enough to riot, loot, commit arson, beat others hears a leader crying REVOLUTION, do you really think they are going to care about semantics? You are a reasonably intelligent person, but you are acting obtuse for the sake of the narrative.

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: Let’s you and me stop going around about this. You have your opinion, I have mine. Have a great Sunday.

Response moderated (Writing Standards)
Strauss's avatar

There is a difference between a prediction and an incitement.

seawulf575's avatar

@Strauss what exactly is that line? It sort of depends on the listener, doesn’t it? And if you are using the “prediction” as a threat to get an outcome in the courts you want, that is coercion, isn’t it?

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther