NOTE to the NSA, FBI, and DOJ: this comment is not an expression of support or approval of the above remark. It is part of a Constitutionally-protected free-speech discussion.

https://www.vox.com/22995013/anti-lynching-act-emmett-till
March 29, 2022
“President Biden just made lynching a federal hate crime after more than 100 years of legislative failure.”

Lynching itself, of course, is murder, and has always been illegal.

My web search turned up other solely leftist sites on the first page; I had to go looking for Redstate’s post.

Compare and contrast.

https://redstate.com/jeffc/2022/03/02/anti-lynching-legislation-is-nothing-more-than-feckless-virtue-signaling-n530521

For any who don’t know, the author Jeff Charles is black.

Interestingly, neither post mentions that the text of the law does not limit the definition of the “lynching” victims to a specific racial identity, not to the method indicated by Saxinis.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/55

Public Law No: 117-107 (03/29/2022)
Emmett Till Antilynching Act

This bill makes lynching a federal hate crime offense.

Specifically, the bill imposes criminal penalties—a fine, a prison term of up to 30 years, or both—on an individual who conspires to commit a hate crime offense that results in death or serious bodily injury or that includes kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill.

It certainly seems to me that this case fits the bill.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waukesha_Christmas_parade_attack

That is more evident if you read the background material that the Wiki editors prefer you not know about.

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2021/11/24/waukesha-suspect-called-to-attack-white-people-had-conviction-for-prior-bomb-threat-n481196

Liberal media would rather attack the journalists mentioning his posts rather than actually report on them, afraid of what they might mean. But that’s dishonest journalism, just like calling the attack an “accident” is dishonest. You don’t have to immediately jump to the motive, but you can and should be reporting on all the evidence.

As we noted, that evidence of his social media does show he was unhappy with the Rittenhouse verdict which came in two days before the Waukesha attack. It also shows that he had posts related to BLM, George Floyd and Malcolm X, as well as anti-police posts.
…
One post, in particular, stands out in terms of the massacre in Waukesha — a post that calls for violence against white people.
…
All six of the fatalities were white including the latest, eight-year-old Jackson Sparks.

Well, the concept was recently stretched in the Arbery case in order to give harsh sentences to the two people who didn’t kill Arbery, including the one who merely took a video without ever thinking a killing would be occurring. The supposedly separate felony was kidnapping, but the goal they thought they were aiming for was a bona fide citizen’s arrest. That’s one of the reasons the case was a travesty of justice.

I think I sort of knew that once upon a time, but thanks for nudging my neurons.

Difference is that as far as I know he was not participating in a separate felony. We don’t know the circumstances of how the fight broke out. For example, someone might have been shooting at him quite suddenly and he shot in self-defense. What precipitated the shootings was not a robbery, as far as I know, or any other crime. For felony murder to kick in – which is what you’re describing – there has to be a different felony in progress.

IDK the law on this, but isn’t the unarmed getaway car driver fully culpable for deaths in the commission of a bank robbery? How is this different, besides being CA?