• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

mike lee: It's 'Overreach' To Arrest Anti-Abortion Activist For Assaulting Elderly Man Twice

holbritter said:
Since you lump Republicans together with one idiot's action, I'm not sure you really want to discuss anything. Same as when someone lumps all Democrats with one idiot's actions.
Click to expand...
Mike Lee is MAGA as are most of the surviving R's in elected positions. The believe that cops shouldn't be gentle, holding perps heads when putting them in the back of cruisers, yet take a more compassionate with perps like Kyle Rittenhouse & this sperm pump.
 
Liberal7360 said:
Ok so what crimes will republicans not object to the criminal being arrested for their crime?

If it had been a 40 something pro choice person assaulting a 72 year old anti choice person TWICE I'm sure the republicans wouldn't think it's overreach to arrest the criminal who assaulted the 72 year old.

But since it's reversed, mike lee believes it's overreach to arrest the anti choice person who assaulted a 72 year old man twice.

What has happened to the Republican Party?


Click to expand...

Mike Lee embarrassed himself here and it isn't the first time.

This disgusting criminal is a freak. I have no doubt that he is personally watching porn 24/7, like Josh Duggar was. He assaulted this man. He deserves to be arrested, and arrested the way he was. Don't do the crime and you won't get arrested in front of your 7 little gifts from Jesus.
 
Liberal7360 said:
Ok so what crimes will republicans not object to the criminal being arrested for their crime?

If it had been a 40 something pro choice person assaulting a 72 year old anti choice person TWICE I'm sure the republicans wouldn't think it's overreach to arrest the criminal who assaulted the 72 year old.

But since it's reversed, mike lee believes it's overreach to arrest the anti choice person who assaulted a 72 year old man twice.

What has happened to the Republican Party?


Click to expand...
Apparently, the guy was engaged in a demonstration nearby an abortion clinic, and the 72 year old guy was an "escort" taking someone into the clinic. The 72 year old guy was apparently harassing the accused man's 12 year old son, and what is said ot have happened is the guy pushed the man away to get him away from his 12 year old son. The city police and the district attorney declined to file charges. The escort guy then filed a private criminal complaint in Philadelphia municipal court, Middleton said. That case was dismissed in July when the man repeatedly didn’t show up in court.

So, a few days later, the man/accused received a “target letter” from the U.S. Attorney’s Office informing him that he was the focus of a federal criminal probe into the same incident. So the guy had his attorney contact the US Attorney's Office to find out what was going on and discuss the case. They didn't get a response from the US Attorney's Office, who then sent like a SWAT team to the guy's house, pounded on the door, guns drawn and demanded the door be opened or it would be broken down.

So, now the guy is federally charged - for shoving someone - under federal law and facing 11 years in prison - for shoving.

We'll see what the defense is here, but a red flag for me in looking at this is that city police and the state district attorney both declined to file charges, AND while the 72 year old guy filed a criminal complaint, it was dismissed because he did not show up to court repeatedly.



.
 
CaughtInThe said:
Republicans will support any lawbreaker.

They were never the party of Law and order.
Click to expand...
Unlike, Democrats who always want to rigorously enforce the law against protesters who "speak truth to power" and utilize the "voice of the unheard..." like lawbreakers who assaulted, battered, and destroyed in order to serve the cause of "racial justice?"

Let's not pretend that either party doesn't act like sports fans, always siding with their team when the ref calls foul....
 
MrNiceGuy said:
Unlike, Democrats who always want to rigorously enforce the law against protesters who "speak truth to power" and utilize the "voice of the unheard..." like lawbreakers who assaulted, battered, and destroyed in order to serve the cause of "racial justice?"

Let's not pretend that either party doesn't act like sports fans, always siding with their team when the ref calls foul....
Click to expand...
Thanks for trying to change the subject. It proves my point.
 
MrNiceGuy said:
Apparently, the guy was engaged in a demonstration nearby an abortion clinic, and the 72 year old guy was an "escort" taking someone into the clinic. The 72 year old guy was apparently harassing the accused man's 12 year old son, and what is said ot have happened is the guy pushed the man away to get him away from his 12 year old son. The city police and the district attorney declined to file charges. The escort guy then filed a private criminal complaint in Philadelphia municipal court, Middleton said. That case was dismissed in July when the man repeatedly didn’t show up in court.

So, a few days later, the man/accused received a “target letter” from the U.S. Attorney’s Office informing him that he was the focus of a federal criminal probe into the same incident. So the guy had his attorney contact the US Attorney's Office to find out what was going on and discuss the case. They didn't get a response from the US Attorney's Office, who then sent like a SWAT team to the guy's house, pounded on the door, guns drawn and demanded the door be opened or it would be broken down.

So, now the guy is federally charged - for shoving someone - under federal law and facing 11 years in prison - for shoving.

We'll see what the defense is here, but a red flag for me in looking at this is that city police and the state district attorney both declined to file charges, AND while the 72 year old guy filed a criminal complaint, it was dismissed because he did not show up to court repeatedly.



.
Click to expand...

Is it a violation of federal law to use force with the intent to injure, intimidate, and interfere with anyone because that person is a provider of reproductive health care? Yes or No..

Is shoving someone using force? Yes or No....

Why does the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act exist?
 
BlueTex said:
Is it a violation of federal law to use force with the intent to injure, intimidate, and interfere with anyone because that person is a provider of reproductive health care? Yes or No..
Click to expand...
Sure.
BlueTex said:
Is shoving someone using force? Yes or No....
Click to expand...
Yes, but it is not illegal if one is defending oneself or others during one's lawful protest or demonstration, even if that protest/demonstration occurs at an abortion clinic, and apparently, the scenario is not as simple as the guy walked up to the escort for no reason and shoved him. Apparently, the guy was in the process of harassing a 12 year old boy, and this was the 12 year old boy's father. Obviously, the facts will be what they are ultimately proved to be, but in 2 seconds I found out that the story was more complicated than was presented in the OP.
BlueTex said:
Why does the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act exist?
Click to expand...
Ostensibly, the avowed purpose was to stop anti-abortion people from blocking the entrances of abortion clinics, which is a valid purpose, in my view. However, on the other side of the coin, it also criminalizes protests and other behaviors that are purely verbal, by calling it "harassment" when that same kind of protest would be considered free speech in any other context.

However, that's another issue, as what we are dealing with here is "shoving," which is decidedly not free speech. The issue becomes whether the shoving was justified or excused in any way under the law, which remains to be seen.

Some of the outrage about the arrest relates to how it went down. I mean, you have city police and the district attorney decline to prosecute. Then, you have the FBI send the guy a letter, and the guy responds to the FBI looking to discuss the matter, and instead of having the guy come in to the FBI office and discuss it with counsel present, the FBI sends out like 25 guys and busts him with guns drawn in front of his wife and kids. For shoving. It's a second degree misdemeanor - MAYBE -- if it's proven and serious -- and in this case we know that the state authorities were not inclined to prosecute. So, it does seem, at first blush here, that this is another case of the FBI really going out of its way to do something in a heavy-handed and over-the-top fashion. What jumps out at me is that they are sending a strong message - you are really risking it big-time if you go to an abortion clinic to protest - and if you get drawn into a shoving match, it's you that's going to be arrested.

And, the punishment seems excessive - 11 years in prison exposure for shoving? Err.... it's this kind of thing that does get people concerned about our criminal justice system. Any self-respecting liberal would be looking askance at this sort of thing. All it takes for this kind of power to be leveled against a person or group you sympathize with is a change in leadership.
 
CaughtInThe said:
Thanks for trying to change the subject. It proves my point.
Click to expand...
It's part of the same subject. It seems rather myopic to sit here and say this is a feature of Republicanism. If it was, you wouldn't see so many Democrats ALSO choosing which laws or crimes they think justify arrest.

Let's not pretend that politics today isn't a team sport, and that most of your side is likewise choosing what laws they think their "side" should be called on to obey.

So, yes, Republicans do this, but it's not just Republicans. Look to the splinter in your own side's eye.
 
jpevans said:
The new civil war won't be a shooting war, but individual attacks like this. cowardly bombings, ambushes of those who think differently. The invisible war, one ass kicking at a time.
Click to expand...
Apparently, this was a guy who prays there with his rosary beads, and the scuffle occurred when the "escort" was harassing this guy's 12 year old son and the shoves were to get him away from the 12 year old.

Now, who knows what actually happened, because neither you nor I were there, but apparently, there is a factual dispute, and that this may well not have been cowardly or an ambush, and wasn't really much of an "ass kicking."

Which side thinks it's morally and should be legally acceptable to punch people who they think are Nazis, racists or white supremacists? Which side thinks violence to serve the cause of social justice is acceptable?
 
jpevans said:
How should LE schedule arrests for violent assaults?
Click to expand...
In a reasonable fashion. When you're talking about a shove, which amounts to a second degree misdemeanor and is only on the FBI radar because of the location at which it occurred, then perhaps they could just respond to the lawyer who contacted them directly to address the issue, and have the guy turn himself in, rather than, you know, spend 10s of thousands of dollars to send 25 cop cars and draw down on the guy's wife and kids, in order to publicly haul him away in cuffs, particularly when this was a situation where other cops and prosecutors had already declined to prosecute, and the alleged victim filed a private criminal action which was dismissed because the alleged victim didn't show up to court repeatedly, and this was also weeks after the event, and not an arrest during the event itself, so there was no real need to have the guy arrested yesterday, today or tomorrow. Such arrests are designed by law enforcement to make a splash - and they succeeded - but that isn't their role.
 
Another MAGA Republican ignoring the reason for law, what else is new?
 
Ikari said:
No, it's ok to protest and such. But as soon as it turns to assault, it matters not the side.
Click to expand...
Save this post for the next social justice, antifa or BLM protest. I'm old enough to remember when it was a moral imperative to "punch a Nazi."
 
Gateman_Wen said:
Indeed he was. Also a very pleasant person on the job too. Can't judge a serial killer by his cover.
Click to expand...
This is about shoving.

Mrs. Houck gave a different version of events to LifeSite. Mr. Houck would take his 12-year-old son with him to counsel on the sidewalk, according to his wife. She said that for “weeks and weeks” a “pro-abortion protester” would speak to the boy saying “crude … inappropriate and disgusting things.”

Mr. Houck would tell the man off, according to his wife, but “he kept doing it and kind of came into [the son’s] personal space” while obscenely ridiculing his father. Eventually, she said Mr. Houck shoved the man and he fell back.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office said Mr. Houck faces a maximum sentence of 11 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and fines of up to $350,000 if convicted.
Click to expand...
Houck’s wife told the website, LifeSiteNews that her husband drove two hours south every Wednesday to speak outside of abortion clinics for six to eight hours at a time and at times would bring their 12-year-old son.

She contended that her husband had shoved a man who had gotten into the personal space of their son and said obscene things about Houck. She told the outlet that the man tried to sue her husband, but the District Court in Philadelphia threw out the case earlier this summer and it was picked up again by Merrick Garland’s Department of Justice.
Click to expand...
nypost.com

Pennsylvania pro-life activist arrested by FBI, charged with assaulting clinic escort

“They said they were going to break in if he didn’t open it. And then they had about five guns pointed at my husband, myself and basically at my kids.”
nypost.com nypost.com
 
Liberal7360 said:
Ok so what crimes will republicans not object to the criminal being arrested for their crime?

If it had been a 40 something pro choice person assaulting a 72 year old anti choice person TWICE I'm sure the republicans wouldn't think it's overreach to arrest the criminal who assaulted the 72 year old.

But since it's reversed, mike lee believes it's overreach to arrest the anti choice person who assaulted a 72 year old man twice.

What has happened to the Republican Party?


Click to expand...
As you may or may not be aware, there are differences of opinion regarding the shoving incident. The state is arguing that Houck intentionally engaged the center employee with the express intent of harming him and separating him from his charge that was trying to enter the clinic. Houck's version of the story is that the employee approached him and his kid, then started screaming obscenities at the kid and got close enough that Houck felt threatened. Fortunately, this is America and we have an FBI with a spare 30 armed SWAT members to take Houck in and sort through the whole thing. Is the FBI raid overkill? Maybe, but you just can't tell when engaging with a white male domestic violence extremist, especially one with a religious connection and because you can't tell then you MUST make these raids in the most dramatic way possible because there's an election coming and the only things you can really run on are Trump and abortion so you have GOT to have as many high profile raids as possible to make your point that the other guys are scary authoritarians and you'll protect the public from them with armed FBI SWAT teams to enforce laws such as those against shoving people.
 
Last edited:
I looked at the FACE act. There's nothing in there that provides you with special protections for screaming obscenities at 12-year olds.
 
A good person wouldn't be out assaulting other folks so that they were getting arrested in front of their wife and kiddies. But man, what a good lesson for the 7 kids, don't be like daddy!
 
Roadvirus said:
I think what he was probably referring to was how the man was arrested and not the why
Click to expand...
I think everybody should be arrested the same way.

People get arrested in front of their kids all the time. They take the kids too pretty often.
 
MrNiceGuy said:
It's part of the same subject. It seems rather myopic to sit here and say this is a feature of Republicanism. If it was, you wouldn't see so many Democrats ALSO choosing which laws or crimes they think justify arrest.

Let's not pretend that politics today isn't a team sport, and that most of your side is likewise choosing what laws they think their "side" should be called on to obey.

So, yes, Republicans do this, but it's not just Republicans. Look to the splinter in your own side's eye.
Click to expand...
To me it's more of which "team" supports my Ideals. While my "team" isn't perfect they are the closest to my ideas of what government should be. Compassionate, empathetic & for the people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom