• @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        14
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Its grandstanding and posturing.

        But there is actually a good argument. Someone who the DOJ have decided wasn’t worth the hassle to properly investigate might still be identified and reported by a co-worker or neighbor. Which then begins to force the DOJ’s hand (they are still cops so they might ignore it but…). I personally think everyone who crowded outside the building deserves to be locked up, but I can see an argument that only people who entered the building or who actively caused damage should be charged.

        Because yes, facial recognition and DMV databases are already a thing. But, much like with a red light ticket, a decent lawyer can work wonders to argue out “a robot claims that I commit a crime”. Whereas having a human in the loop removes that gotcha. Hell, if my cousin is any indication, you don’t even need a lawyer to argue against a red light camera or an automated speed trap and just need to care enough to show up to the courthouse for a few hours.

        Also, regardless, this is indeed (attempted) obstruction of justice to protect insurrectionists.

        • @tburkhol
          link
          English
          51 year ago

          Or people think they recognize faces in the crowd, and we get a whole slew of Richard Jewells and Sunil Tripathis

      • @niktemadur
        link
        English
        41 year ago

        any little suspect from small time crime gets their face plastered all over local news

        Only if they’re black or hispanic. There’s a narrative to push, don’t you know.

    • theotherone
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      It’s theater for their deep state struggle fundraising. Gotta shake down the marks for the cash. You think he’s got a sugar daddy? He’s not a Supreme Court justice………