> The 30 year sentence was for hiding documentation [...] it wasn't just "transporting Zines"

As far as I can tell, the moving of zines (he was pulled over and had a box in his car) is what's being presented as "hiding documentation" - not something beyond that.

> being sought under a federal warrant

Timeline seems to be that a warrant was obtained after pulling him over ("Sanchez-Estrada was then arrested on state traffic offenses, and officers obtained a search warrant [...]"). Can't find a source saying there was a warrant prior to this.

> The warrant was for documentation after the protesters shot fireworks to bring out first responders from the ICE facility, and allegedly one of the group shot a responder in the neck instead of the head.

It's true that demonstrators were setting off fireworks, and it's true that Benjamin Song later shot at a police officer who had drawn his gun. But it's just the government's narrative/speculation that the intent of the fireworks was to draw out first responders to ambush, and that Sanchez-Estrada's zines were in some way documentation of this despite him not being at the protest and his wife not being the shooter.

There are murderers who get shorter sentences. This is a clear attempt to discourage ICE protests by using the label "Antifa" as some sort of left-wing terrorist organization to send a message as the Trump appointed judge stated.

I think all of this hinges on whether or not you think it was a protest. If they had been peacefully sitting outside the facility holding signs, I think you'd have a case that the sentencing is insane. But if they were actively planning a break-in & preparing to use deadly force, that's quite another matter. I haven't spent a lot of timing reading about it, but what I have read suggests it was much closer to the latter.

If you think that this was a protest then yeah it's worrying.

The feds case, which they did win convictions based on, was that they were terrorists who set off fireworks to lure police into an ambush, and there weren't more casualties because one of the members shot early and only injured one cop. An accessory to this who hid evidence is also part of the crime in the Feds case

Is this embellished by the Feds? I think so, it seems some of the group did not think this was the plan. But there did seem to be a plan and it did involve bringing guns, setting off fireworks, opening the gate and trying to break out the prisoners, and "not going quietly"

> ... like these two were accused of planning a murder in advance, ...

The 30 years is for evidence tampering. The rest have been convicted of various terrorist charges. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Prairieland_ICE_detention...

It's really funny because all of this has played out in the past with people that actually conspired to do all that and more and walked away free. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Smith_sedition_trial

That case, the incredibly bad handling of Ruby Ridge and Waco put a real freeze on the FBI dealing with domestic terrorism, and then the focus moved outward with 9/11.

But now "domestic terrorism" is priority number 1. Enjoy your choices folks.

30 years for an accessory charge? For someone who did not attend the event? Sounds excessive.

> No, champ, it's the flying of the plane into the WTC

Sir, a second zine has struck the south tower

If it costs 30 years for transporting zines, how much is treason and conspiracy to overthrow the government worth?

Was the speech illegal? Not giving my email to this site so I can’t read the rest but it seems odd that any sort of speech gets multi year sentences much less multi decade unless it was direct calls to violence.

Thank you, at least that article doesn't require an email address to read it.

> One fired an AR-15 at the police, which goes beyond legitimate protest into inciting violence (and maybe even deliberate provocation).

Uh, I think firing a gun at someone is a bit more than "inciting violence", more like attempted murder?

The article doesn't say what the actual charges were. Was it tampering with evidence? Although 30 years for just tampering with evidence doesn't seem right either. Maybe there's more that they're leaving out?

Another comment in another HN thread shared this quote and link:

> "Prosecutors said that the group launched a premeditated terror attack on the detention facility inspired by antifa ideology, by setting off fireworks, vandalizing property, and shooting at police officers who responded. One officer was struck in the neck with a bullet and survived."

https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/news/ice-detention-attack-defe...

Perhaps the cop getting shot in the neck is why they're throwing the book at them.

It's a crime to deliberately conceal another crime, whether you do it by raking leaves, deleting Internet posts, or setting your car on fire. It's called accessory after the fact.

More exactly:

If your roommate attended a protest where someone got shot, and you transported their zines that indicate your roommate shares political ideology with the shooter, is anyone really under the impression this is not criminal in nature?

And yes, that’s not criminal.

Except that's not even remotely similar to what happened in this case.

What an incredibly lazy and dishonest interpretation of what happened here.

So do you

> https://www.newsweek.com/full-list-capitol-rioters-jailed-se...

The longest sentence of an actual rioter was 22 years.

Compare that to this and explain why he got more for less

wow, I feel like the overton window hasn't just shifted, it's off the page. Back in the 90s we would openly share the Anarchist's Cookbook, CIA field manual for sabotage, etc. then lace our emails intentionally with "trigger words" when it was theorized that the NSA was reading all Internet traffic, so as to emphasize our free speech absolutism.

Now, an article comes out about sentences handed down for ... free speech ... and the reaction is to close the tab because they ... made some speech that you didn't like? Free speech for me, not for thee?

Don Lemon did no such thing. He covered the event as is his right as a journalist.

I can't imagine "both side'sing" the situation in the United States right now. The country has been taken over by a criminally corrupt, sick individual, who given his responsibility w.r.t Jan 6th isn't even eligible for the office he holds - the country is collapsing.

What? That's pretty bad guarantee. The fact that Trump releases his friends has nothing to do with what should his opposition do. If anything respecting acts of former governments should be the norm.

... but also, you probably want the Trump clan to rule, forever.

Top tier copium. The fascists are making it unsafe to not be Nazis and you shrug, both sides.