I am noticing a lot of demwits on here
Thinks it is now okay to charge and try American citizens without an investigation oran impartial jury hopefully the police will railroad them very shortly and give them a taste of the justice system they want
Top | Newest First | Oldest First
Graylight · 51-55, F
I'm not going to pint out the irony of your post title, because I'm sure everyone who's run across it will do that.
No Americans are currently being tried for anything without due process. If you're referring to the Jan 6 hearing, it's not a trial, it's not an investigation. It's a presentation. They're not asking a single question they don't already know the answer to. They're simply laying out the case for charges so the public understands. It's that darned transparency in government thing.
Republicans were asked to play an equal role in the hearings. They refused.
Republicans were invited to tell their sides of the story or present any evidence they had. They refused.
They were compelled. They refused again. They were held in contempt.
Republicans, when offered a microphone after being forced to appear, traded their usual tirades and bravado for the 5th amendment.
It's not railroading if you're actually guilty. Besides, I think you've offered quite enough deplorable opinion for one day, don't you?
No Americans are currently being tried for anything without due process. If you're referring to the Jan 6 hearing, it's not a trial, it's not an investigation. It's a presentation. They're not asking a single question they don't already know the answer to. They're simply laying out the case for charges so the public understands. It's that darned transparency in government thing.
Republicans were asked to play an equal role in the hearings. They refused.
Republicans were invited to tell their sides of the story or present any evidence they had. They refused.
They were compelled. They refused again. They were held in contempt.
Republicans, when offered a microphone after being forced to appear, traded their usual tirades and bravado for the 5th amendment.
It's not railroading if you're actually guilty. Besides, I think you've offered quite enough deplorable opinion for one day, don't you?
Northwest · M
I'm sure you have some examples? Reality is that the Jan 6th committee is holding hearings. When they're ready to make recommendations, that will go to the Justice Department will decide if indictments are in order, and so, if they should impanel a grand jury, and if the Grand Jury decides if charges should be filed, and when/where to go to trial, and then if the person is found guilty, get their due punishment.
Or perhaps you're clueless, and you have no idea how the process works?
Or perhaps you're clueless, and you have no idea how the process works?
View 3 more replies »
@BlueVeins No, and even before we adopted a constitution, we had notions like stare decisis and the need for impartial justice. Even the bloody Brits worked to that end, despite having dualling courts of equity and law and turning a blind eye towards Roman law.
That's why we have legal systems, with the opportunity to challenge the fairness of a jury pool, etc.
The problem(s) is (are) that I'm not sure what we're talking about, because Trump isn't on trial and Congress is out there on a limb with this investigation.
We really don't have much precedent as to the "rights" of "targets" of Congressional Investigations, much less rules.
Down the road, if there are prosecutions, there are rules and norms that can apply, but right now, Trump isn't able to defend himself, and it doesn't bother me too much because he's chosen not to participate.
In fact, he really rarely participates in the legal system when push comes to shove, because it would put him in a "perjury trap" to do so.
Are we even talking about Trump, though? Bannon for example is actually more interesting, because he's been charged with a crime and the judge has pretty much said he can't argue his contempt for the law as a defense to his contempt charge.
That's why we have legal systems, with the opportunity to challenge the fairness of a jury pool, etc.
The problem(s) is (are) that I'm not sure what we're talking about, because Trump isn't on trial and Congress is out there on a limb with this investigation.
We really don't have much precedent as to the "rights" of "targets" of Congressional Investigations, much less rules.
Down the road, if there are prosecutions, there are rules and norms that can apply, but right now, Trump isn't able to defend himself, and it doesn't bother me too much because he's chosen not to participate.
In fact, he really rarely participates in the legal system when push comes to shove, because it would put him in a "perjury trap" to do so.
Are we even talking about Trump, though? Bannon for example is actually more interesting, because he's been charged with a crime and the judge has pretty much said he can't argue his contempt for the law as a defense to his contempt charge.
@BlueVeins They don't, but a grand jury is kind of a preliminary hearing, and that is going on now, even though it's secret and the targets don't get full rights to confront their accusers, etc.
Honestly, I think the entire grand jury system is pretty unworkable, but that's a whole different topic.
My guess is OP was whining about all the crap the Select Committee is slinging, and how folks are jumping past the indictment phase to say they should be in jail, and I get that.
We're pretty much Jerry rigging things here, with Congressional hearings pushing and interacting with criminal investigations, and it's not pretty.
Honestly, I think the entire grand jury system is pretty unworkable, but that's a whole different topic.
My guess is OP was whining about all the crap the Select Committee is slinging, and how folks are jumping past the indictment phase to say they should be in jail, and I get that.
We're pretty much Jerry rigging things here, with Congressional hearings pushing and interacting with criminal investigations, and it's not pretty.
ElwoodBlues · M
windinhishair · 61-69, M
Who wants to try US citizens without an investigation? I haven't seen that on here other than people wanting Biden charged with crimes. But that's just idiotic talk. I haven't seen anyone seriously proposing that.
Who's charging and trying?
Is it people expressing their opinions you're complaining about?
Because Republicants and Demwits both do that here, and while it's annoying, it's why I'm still here.
Is it people expressing their opinions you're complaining about?
Because Republicants and Demwits both do that here, and while it's annoying, it's why I'm still here.
TexChik · F
Liberalism has corrupted the system. Criminals walk if their skin is dark and conservatives ( white males) get charged and maligned . When there is equal justice under the law, things will be better .
FreestyleArt · 31-35, M
Let them drink Kool-aid. There's always room for Jonestown
CorvusBlackthorne · 100+, M
@FreestyleArt When last I checked, it was you lot drinking the proverbial kool-aid.
Vin53 · M
What in Great Caesers Ghost are you blathering about now?
LordShadowfire · 46-50, M
CorvusBlackthorne · 100+, M
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
CorvusBlackthorne · 100+, M
@sunsporter1649 I thank you for the self-portrait, but it is beside the point.