Supreme Court backs Secret Service arrest of man confronting Cheney

[Kelvin Mace]

39. OK, now we have conflicting accounts

As the matter never came to court, no one was compelled to testify UNDER OATH about any pertinent facts, so this is hearsay. How can anyone say he "falsely denied" anything when no evidence has ever been presented in a court of law UNDER OATH?

Again:

1) The USSS agents on the scene at the time apparently saw NOTHING which constituted assault committed in front of them since, if they had, they would have taken the man down there and then. If you assault the vice-president of the United States in front of his security detail, you WILL BE TAKEN DOWN RIGHT THERE.

2) Significantly after the fact, a USSS supervisor decided that a "retaliatory arrest" was in order, and the Thomas Court upheld this new power 9-0.