Wouldn't this be obstruction of justice?

[rambot]

https://imgur.com/zsoujOe

Mike Johnson says that they are blurring the faces of the J6 rioters so that they avoid prosecution. Well I have a few questions:

1) How many of these people have not yet been caught or charged?

2) If that footage has been integral to the prosecution of crimes, couldn't you assume it could continue to be used as evidence?

3) If it can still be used as evidence, then wouldn't the face blurring be "obstruction of justice"?

Initially I thought maybe when he said "keep them safe from retaliation" he meant some left wing strike force....but then....he made a point of mentioning the DOJ.

So...do I understand that he is trying to protect potential criminals by blurring faces so that the DOJ could not charge them? Cause that seems so totally messed: If that is occurring, wouldn't that be obstruction of justice?

BUT, I'm willing to accept that my source is...not super contextualized. Can someone shed some light? Explain it to me like I'm a Canadian......

 

[Hans Blaster]

Mike Johnson says that they are blurring the faces of the J6 rioters so that they avoid prosecution. Well I have a few questions:

1) How many of these people have not yet been caught or charged?

The online sleuths have counted those entering the Capitol at a bit over 3000, about 1000 of those have been charged. The sleuths have ID some, but not all of the uncharged 2000.

2) If that footage has been integral to the prosecution of crimes, couldn't you assume it could continue to be used as evidence?

The DOJ and FBI have all of this footage (and much more) with time stamps and full resolution without blurring.

3) If it can still be used as evidence, then wouldn't the face blurring be "obstruction of justice"?

It's only *us* that Johnson doesn't want to see the criminals.

Initially I thought maybe when he said "keep them safe from retaliation" he meant some left wing strike force....but then....he made a point of mentioning the DOJ.

Thare are probably better quality visions of many of the faces of the unarrested that might be extracted from the security footage, but the sleuths have faces for them:

#SeditionInsiders

So...do I understand that he is trying to protect potential criminals by blurring faces so that the DOJ could not charge them? Cause that seems so totally messed: If that is occurring, wouldn't that be obstruction of justice?

He's an idiot, but he can't stop the DOJ.

BUT, I'm willing to accept that my source is...not super contextualized. Can someone shed some light? Explain it to me like I'm a Canadian......

Well, ya know, the new prime minister wants to protect the mob of his political allies that charged up Parliament hill in their toques and hockey sweaters to grab control by not given the mounties the pictures of their faces, but lo and behold they all ready got the pictures of those hosers.

 

[rambot]

The online sleuths have counted those entering the Capitol at a bit over 3000, about 1000 of those have been charged. The sleuths have ID some, but not all of the uncharged 2000.

The DOJ and FBI have all of this footage (and much more) with time stamps and full resolution without blurring.

It's only *us* that Johnson doesn't want to see the criminals.


Thare are probably better quality visions of many of the faces of the unarrested that might be extracted from the security footage, but the sleuths have faces for them:

#SeditionInsiders



He's an idiot, but he can't stop the DOJ.

Ok. Perfect, thank you. That's what made sense to me.

Well, ya know, the new prime minister wants to protect the mob of his political allies that charged up Parliament hill in their toques and hockey sweaters to grab control by not given the mounties the pictures of their faces, but lo and behold they all ready got the pictures of those hosers.

Oof. But you did miss an "eh?"

 

[Bradskii]

Well, ya know, the new prime minister wants to protect the mob of his political allies that charged up Parliament hill in their toques and hockey sweaters to grab control by not given the mounties the pictures of their faces, but lo and behold they all ready got the pictures of those hosers.

I like it. Now Australian please. Or maybe the UK?

 

[USincognito]

He said the quiet part out loud.