zephyr88 said:

---

When judges don't even take care of their own, you know there's a big problem.

---

Leftists believe conservatives aren't human. It's exactly how we've gotten here.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

zephyr88 said:

---

When judges don't even take care of their own, you know there's a big problem.

---

Leftists believe conservatives aren't human. It's exactly how we've gotten here.

---

From time to time I listen to MSNBC just to try to get some kind of understanding about them. I wish I could remember who it was so I could potentially post the audio, but they had a person who (with a straight face) said that 'there was nothing more pro- life than abortion'. I kid you not - they really said that. The argument was that it was pro-life, of the person receiving the abortion - 'setting them free to live their life', rather than be chained to an unwanted pregnancy. They just aren't like us.

Quote:

---

Nicholas Roske, who now goes by Sophie

---

Logos Stick said:

---

If you are conservative, the left wants you dead. It's pretty simple.

---

And there's a permission structure encouraging it.

We need to start charging and prosecuting them for obstruction of justice.

The case could be made that "prison justice" is more "just" than the judicial system.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

We need to start charging and prosecuting them for obstruction of justice.

---

This guy sees a pattern behind it (from other thread)

The Rubicon is behind you whether you like it or not https://t.co/X9j7QNpugh

— Auron MacIntyre (@AuronMacintyre) October 4, 2025

I would say this as only something to discuss….

Kids who are victims of these mass psyop campaigns could get 8 min if they get deprogrammed and talk about their experience. If they don't…..give them 20 years in prison.

aezmvp said:

---

I'm a pretty optimistic guy but I'm at a loss for how we deal with judges, police, DAs, etc. that will release, not charge and excuse people who riot, attempt murder, arson, bombings, ambushes on ICE, etc. while throwing the book at anyone on the other side of the aisle. One of the things that led to French and English Revolutions was a failure of the courts. When your current system fails... I'm not sure the solution.

---

Yet another reason Soros should be labeled a terrorist. He and his organizations (unfortunately often with our own taxpayer money) are behind the Soros DAs (and for those that vote D and think that's a conspiracy theory, he literally wrote an op-ed himself on this issue). Along with most other chaos-sowing issues in the US. Labor unions or whoever else are major dem donors and not terrorists. But Soros is and is rightfully called out by other more sane countries for it. Take away Soros funded DAs, and this issue likely largely goes away.

That's an interesting proposition. At what point does a foundation become more like that. For the moment have been hoping it would really tick off Russia or China -- they would act.

I mean, the would-be assassin drove to his house, had second thoughts, and called the police on themselves.

Clearly unwell as most people would have just driven home, but it's a pretty stiff penalty for NOT attempting a crime.

AtomicActuator said:

---

I mean, the would-be assassin drove to his house, had second thoughts, and called the police on themselves.

Clearly unwell as must people would have just driven home, but it's a pretty stiff penalty for NOT attempting a crime.

---

And may have gotten a stiffer penalty if he had walked into the open Capitol. Sickening.

Can't imagine why some of us acknowledge he we have a two-tiered justice system. And others pretend they don't see it.

Iraq2xVeteran said:

---

It is ridiculous how Nicholas Roske, who now goes by Sophie, received only 8 years in prison for attempted murder. This is one of numerous examples of how progressive criminal justice reforms have weakened deterrence, demoralized police departments, and increased crimes. Consequently, lawlessness, anarchy, chaos, and violence have increased in counties with progressive prosecutors.

---

As I understand it, Roske never actually acted on the assassination attempt. He actually called 911 on himself after seeing marshals at the Kavanaugh's house. He should be punished but why should be get substantially more than 8 years?

Yeah, seditious conspiracy to commit an attack on the democratic process itself, and then actually going through with it, is reasonably considered worse than driving to someone's house with bad intentions, but doing nothing.

People who merely entered the capitol got much shorter sentences and virtually all were pardoned.

Is there any recourse against judges from a higher court for ridiculously low sentencing? Seems the SCOTUS justice who was targeted might have a strong opinion or two for the judge who gave his would be assassin the minimum sentence.

Somehow I don't think this judge would have thought 8 years was enough if some right wing kook set about to kill Sotomayor or Kagan.

"About to kill" isn't what I would describe sitting in a car and calling the police on yourself.

Imagine if they gave out the maximum 30 years, hardly less than you might get for actually killing him. That doesn't send the tough on crime message you think. It sends the message that you may as well commit to your actions and get your money's worth, so to speak. I don't think we want that.

8 years for NOT attempting to kill a guy and turning yourself in is steep. In fact, under the Model Penal Code 5.01(4) Roske would have likely been found not guilty for voluntarily and completely renunciating the attempt. However, Congress never adopted this exception into federal law like many states have.

AtomicActuator said:

---

"About to kill" isn't what I would describe sitting in a car and calling the police on yourself.

Imagine if they gave out the maximum 30 years, hardly less than you might get for actually killing him. That doesn't send the tough on crime message you think. It sends the message that you may as well commit to your actions and get your money's worth, so to speak. I don't think we want that.

8 years for NOT attempting to kill a guy and turning yourself in is steep. In fact, under the Model Penal Code 5.01(4) Roske would have likely been found not guilty for voluntarily and completely renunciating the attempt. However, Congress never adopted this exception into federal law like many states have.

---

Unlike the insanity or `went mental' plea that is a "not guilty" form could tolerate. Turning yourself in when not discovered (in other words all on your own hook?) and calling off the crime does rate some recognition.

Right, to meet the renunciation standard it has to be truly voluntary, where external factors like an increased chance of being caught didn't drive the decision, and complete, where you fully abandoned the attempt and not just delayed it.

They would have failed the first test, if, for example, they had been scared off by a guard dog, security camera, or alarm system, and would have failed the second if they had just went home and didn't tell anyone, since it could be assumed they were just delaying the attempt until a better plan could be devised.

Roske clearly meets both though, so should absolutely be getting leniency in sentencing given the federal law doesn't include this exception.

AtomicActuator said:

---

Right, to meet the renunciation standard it has to be truly voluntary, where external factors like an increased chance of being caught didn't drive the decision, and complete, where you fully abandoned the attempt and not just delayed it.

They would have failed the first test, if, for example, they had been scared off by a guard dog, security camera, or alarm system, and would have failed the second if they had just went home and didn't tell anyone, since it could be assumed they were just delaying the attempt until a better plan could be devised.

Roske clearly meets both though, so should absolutely be getting leniency in sentencing given the federal law doesn't include this exception.

---

That sounds like a well-formed and logical (very unusual these days) renunciation standard, covering all kinds of bases. It sure sounds like does meet the standard. Caveat: Really have not read much up on it outside of such threads. In fact, had transposed it in mind with another threatened SC judge incident.

One can argue that the ability to call of something one one's own, and then even report it, rates a good bit of benefit of the doubt.

🚨 DOJ asks the Fourth Circuit to overturn an 8-year sentence for the would-be Kavanaugh assassin, arguing the district court gave undue weight to Roske's mental health, prison conditions as a transgender inmate, and apparent remorse. It also asks for a new judge on remand. pic.twitter.com/DYpsy0QUYd

— SCOTUS Wire (@scotus_wire) June 23, 2026

one safe place said:

---

Being soft on crime means you get more crime.

---

That's the intent. Make it easier to murder Republicans.

BusterAg said:

---

I do not think that this guy is going to make it out of prison alive.

---

I have no problem with that!

titan said:

---

AtomicActuator said:

---

Right, to meet the renunciation standard it has to be truly voluntary, where external factors like an increased chance of being caught didn't drive the decision, and complete, where you fully abandoned the attempt and not just delayed it.

They would have failed the first test, if, for example, they had been scared off by a guard dog, security camera, or alarm system, and would have failed the second if they had just went home and didn't tell anyone, since it could be assumed they were just delaying the attempt until a better plan could be devised.

Roske clearly meets both though, so should absolutely be getting leniency in sentencing given the federal law doesn't include this exception.

---

That sounds like a well-formed and logical (very unusual these days) renunciation standard, covering all kinds of bases. It sure sounds like does meet the standard. Caveat: Really have not read much up on it outside of such threads. In fact, had transposed it in mind with another threatened SC judge incident.

One can argue that the ability to call of something one one's own, and then even report it, rates a good bit of benefit of the doubt.

---

I am not a lawyer, and I didn't really follow this all that closely but I seem to remember he only called and reported himself after he saw the U.S. Marshalls. Wouldn't the presence of the marshalls constitute an "external factor like an increased chance of being caught"? He planned it, gathered material, and drove cross country to do it, then saw law enforcement present and called himself in. In my mind its less bad than carrying out the act, and 15 years would be an appropriate sentence if ole Hank here was the judge. If i missed something on the germane facts to the situation please correct me. I don't consider his after the fact decision to change genders germane in the least.