Anonymous wrote:Dude lost his job over a sub 🤣

He lost his job because of the fascism.

The ICE babies lost their tempers because of a sandwich.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please write to the US Attorney and propose a prosecution based on this. My guess is you will not succeed because he was already prosecuted under federal law.

And good luck getting the US Attorney to prosecute considering they are also they attorneys who prosecute the DC code. I am sure Bondi will get right on it lol.

This whole operation has turned the prosecutors office into a complete joke.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/no-credibility-left-judge-upbraids-prosecutors-for-handling-of-dc-surge-cases/3984073/

Too bad he didn’t beat up the cop because he would have gotten a pardon like the J6ers. MAGA are big fat hypocrites.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dude lost his job over a sub 🤣

And you have lost your morale!

This dude stood up and is already a hero!!! And you, hiding behind bushes?

A hero? Meh. Maybe the sandwich variety

Anonymous wrote:Please write to the US Attorney and propose a prosecution based on this. My guess is you will not succeed because he was already prosecuted under federal law.

And good luck getting the US Attorney to prosecute considering they are also they attorneys who prosecute the DC code. I am sure Bondi will get right on it lol.

Anonymous wrote:Dude lost his job over a sub 🤣

And you have lost your morale!

This dude stood up and is already a hero!!! And you, hiding behind bushes?

Dude lost his job over a sub 🤣

Please write to the US Attorney and propose a prosecution based on this. My guess is you will not succeed because he was already prosecuted under federal law.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's funny everyone thinks J6 is relevant. Do you believe the Subway Assaulter will be allowed to introduce evidence of J6, and the judge will acquit?

Did you miss the part where the grand jury didn’t indict him? And in fact the defense attorneys in these cases have raised the J6 pardons in court.

That is separate from his employment case and has no bearing in whether he violated DOJ conduct policies. a jury does not have to find that I violated the law in order for my government employer to fire me. This is a huge logical gap in your argument.

Of course it has bearings. If DOJ allows Jared Wise to be employed, it means that they are not fairly applying their conduct policy.

Please supply the video of Jared Wise actually hitting a federal officer. I have asked at least 20 times and you apparently do not have the evidence.

So the distinction for the people who are logic challenged is that sandwich jizz guy is ON FILM assaulting an officer. Wise is not on film If you have the video of Wise hitting an officer post it.

Hey, glad you returned to the thread.

Dunn has already been fired for throwing a sandwich at officers.

Is your position that if Wise never laid a finger on an officer himself, he’s a good candidate for employment at the DOJ even though he repeatedly screamed at a violent, rioting mob to kill officers?

My position is people work with the evidence you give them and your boy gave a video of himself assaulting an officer. That is his fault for doing that on film. And he has to litigate at MSPB to get his back.

No, I’m asking about your position on Wise’s employment status. His repeatedly imploring an already violent mob to kill police officers was caught on tape. Is it appropriate for the DOJ to employ him?

Yes because he can express his opinion just like people post horrible things online about Pres Trump and do not get prosecuted.. If you find a video of people saying they rioted because of what he said, or find a video of him actually striking someone, post it and we can talk. Otherwise get back to licking Jaimey Raskins taint.

Screaming at violent rioters to kill isn’t an opinion any more than yelling “fire” in a crowded movie theater is an opinion. Not all speech is protected by the 1st amendment. Also, the law doesn’t require anyone’s actions to have been influenced by Wise for what he did to be a crime.

Code of the District of Columbia
§ 22–1322. Rioting or inciting to riot.

(a) A riot in the District of Columbia is a public disturbance involving an assemblage of 5 or more persons which by tumultuous and violent conduct or the threat thereof creates grave danger of damage or injury to property or persons.

(b) Whoever willfully engages in a riot in the District of Columbia shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than 180 days or a fine of not more than the amount set forth in § 22-3571.01, or both.

(c) Whoever willfully incites or urges other persons to engage in a riot shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than 180 days or a fine of not more than the amount set forth in § 22-3571.01, or both.

(d) If in the course and as a result of a riot a person suffers serious bodily harm or there is property damage in excess of $5,000, every person who willfully incited or urged others to engage in the riot shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than 10 years or a fine of not more than the amount set forth in § 22-3571.01, or both.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's funny everyone thinks J6 is relevant. Do you believe the Subway Assaulter will be allowed to introduce evidence of J6, and the judge will acquit?

Did you miss the part where the grand jury didn’t indict him? And in fact the defense attorneys in these cases have raised the J6 pardons in court.

That is separate from his employment case and has no bearing in whether he violated DOJ conduct policies. a jury does not have to find that I violated the law in order for my government employer to fire me. This is a huge logical gap in your argument.

Of course it has bearings. If DOJ allows Jared Wise to be employed, it means that they are not fairly applying their conduct policy.

Please supply the video of Jared Wise actually hitting a federal officer. I have asked at least 20 times and you apparently do not have the evidence.

So the distinction for the people who are logic challenged is that sandwich jizz guy is ON FILM assaulting an officer. Wise is not on film If you have the video of Wise hitting an officer post it.

Hey, glad you returned to the thread.

Dunn has already been fired for throwing a sandwich at officers.

Is your position that if Wise never laid a finger on an officer himself, he’s a good candidate for employment at the DOJ even though he repeatedly screamed at a violent, rioting mob to kill officers?

My position is people work with the evidence you give them and your boy gave a video of himself assaulting an officer. That is his fault for doing that on film. And he has to litigate at MSPB to get his back.

No, I’m asking about your position on Wise’s employment status. His repeatedly imploring an already violent mob to kill police officers was caught on tape. Is it appropriate for the DOJ to employ him?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's funny everyone thinks J6 is relevant. Do you believe the Subway Assaulter will be allowed to introduce evidence of J6, and the judge will acquit?

Did you miss the part where the grand jury didn’t indict him? And in fact the defense attorneys in these cases have raised the J6 pardons in court.

That is separate from his employment case and has no bearing in whether he violated DOJ conduct policies. a jury does not have to find that I violated the law in order for my government employer to fire me. This is a huge logical gap in your argument.

Of course it has bearings. If DOJ allows Jared Wise to be employed, it means that they are not fairly applying their conduct policy.

Please supply the video of Jared Wise actually hitting a federal officer. I have asked at least 20 times and you apparently do not have the evidence.

So the distinction for the people who are logic challenged is that sandwich jizz guy is ON FILM assaulting an officer. Wise is not on film If you have the video of Wise hitting an officer post it.

Hey, glad you returned to the thread.

Dunn has already been fired for throwing a sandwich at officers.

Is your position that if Wise never laid a finger on an officer himself, he’s a good candidate for employment at the DOJ even though he repeatedly screamed at a violent, rioting mob to kill officers?

My position is people work with the evidence you give them and your boy gave a video of himself assaulting an officer. That is his fault for doing that on film. And he has to litigate at MSPB to get his back.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's funny everyone thinks J6 is relevant. Do you believe the Subway Assaulter will be allowed to introduce evidence of J6, and the judge will acquit?

Did you miss the part where the grand jury didn’t indict him? And in fact the defense attorneys in these cases have raised the J6 pardons in court.

That is separate from his employment case and has no bearing in whether he violated DOJ conduct policies. a jury does not have to find that I violated the law in order for my government employer to fire me. This is a huge logical gap in your argument.

Of course it has bearings. If DOJ allows Jared Wise to be employed, it means that they are not fairly applying their conduct policy.

Please supply the video of Jared Wise actually hitting a federal officer. I have asked at least 20 times and you apparently do not have the evidence.

So the distinction for the people who are logic challenged is that sandwich jizz guy is ON FILM assaulting an officer. Wise is not on film If you have the video of Wise hitting an officer post it.

Hey, glad you returned to the thread.

Dunn has already been fired for throwing a sandwich at officers.

Is your position that if Wise never laid a finger on an officer himself, he’s a good candidate for employment at the DOJ even though he repeatedly screamed at a violent, rioting mob to kill officers?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's funny everyone thinks J6 is relevant. Do you believe the Subway Assaulter will be allowed to introduce evidence of J6, and the judge will acquit?

Did you miss the part where the grand jury didn’t indict him? And in fact the defense attorneys in these cases have raised the J6 pardons in court.

That is separate from his employment case and has no bearing in whether he violated DOJ conduct policies. a jury does not have to find that I violated the law in order for my government employer to fire me. This is a huge logical gap in your argument.

He’s not getting fired you pos
He did the right thing for gods sake it was a sandwich

Shut up you anti American maga fool

Calling me anti American MAGA really helps the cause. Keep going with this "logic." While you are at it apply for a new job.

+1 Only those with arrested development at the toddler stage think it is ok to throw food at people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's funny everyone thinks J6 is relevant. Do you believe the Subway Assaulter will be allowed to introduce evidence of J6, and the judge will acquit?

Did you miss the part where the grand jury didn’t indict him? And in fact the defense attorneys in these cases have raised the J6 pardons in court.

That is separate from his employment case and has no bearing in whether he violated DOJ conduct policies. a jury does not have to find that I violated the law in order for my government employer to fire me. This is a huge logical gap in your argument.

He’s not getting fired you pos
He did the right thing for gods sake it was a sandwich

Shut up you anti American maga fool

Calling me anti American MAGA really helps the cause. Keep going with this "logic." While you are at it apply for a new job.

Anonymous wrote:No sandwich guy isn’t getting fired the DOJ would be sued they don’t want that discovery will suck for them and Bondi knows this.

Sandwich guy has a great case and he would win millions

Is this his boyfriend? He's not getting his job back because he violated DOJ policy.

Be prepared to spend 100,000 to litigate your losing case at MSPB.