At this point whenever you're faced with a question you'd rather not answer, you seem to deflect and try to make it personal.
I guess I have to conclude you are just not willing to answer the questions I've asked you (which was only based on something you said - that sometimes our justice system "gets it wrong"), which you have chosen not to elaborate on it and instead accuse me of personally disliking you, or something along those lines.
Do you realize sentences written in the second person singular are personal?
I answered your question. I won't speculate about whether a particular court ruling is right or wrong. It is the decision of the court. When a decision is overturned by a higher court, then the original decision was wrong. That's when the justice system gets it wrong. In the end, the overall system works. I have faith in the American justice system. It's not perfect, but it is better than any alternative. The American government was organized as a democratic republic, i.e. we elect people to represent us and protect the freedoms we are guaranteed by our constitution. The system was designed to protect the rights of minorities against the excesses of the majority. I am grateful to have the personal freedoms the bill of rights grants to me. I am grateful for having the protection of due process. I do not like thinking about the prospect of the police arbitrarily picking me up off the street, incarcerating me, and never knowing why. Having writ of habeas corpus available to us all is important. Not so in many other countries. I choose not to be cynical about current events and to be optimistic that the divisions can be corrected.
Yes @Steve R. and that's yet ANOTHER term that liberals have tried so hard to re-define to assist their narrative being pushed.
"judicial activism".
Traditionally, judicial activism is a term used by Conservatives to describe what has happened whereby Courts have essentially "invented" things with only loose and very creatively derived connections to actual other things. Why Conservatives? Because they are typically on the losing side of it, as many liberal philosophies 100% depend on these creatively invented things, whether they be based on constitutional-related doctrines or elsewise.
However, liberals have recently begun trying to make this term happen for their own purposes, decrying the reversal of Roe v Wade as "judicial activism" when, of course, it is anything BUT: The judicial activism was the tortured metaphors that gave rise to Roe v Wade in the first place.
As I think back to Mean Girls whenever I see CNN say "the Big Lie", not to mean all of their own big lies, but the election irregularities .... I think "Stop Trying to Make FETCH Happen".
Do you realize sentences written in the second person singular are personal?
I answered your question. I won't speculate about whether a particular court ruling is right or wrong. It is the decision of the court. When a decision is overturned by a higher court, then the original decision was wrong. That's when the justice system gets it wrong. In the end, the overall system works. I have faith in the American justice system. It's not perfect, but it is better than any alternative. The American government was organized as a democratic republic, i.e. we elect people to represent us and protect the freedoms we are guaranteed by our constitution. The system was designed to protect the rights of minorities against the excesses of the majority. I am grateful to have the personal freedoms the bill of rights grants to me. I am grateful for having the protection of due process. I do not like thinking about the prospect of the police arbitrarily picking me up off the street, incarcerating me, and never knowing why. Having writ of habeas corpus available to us all is important. Not so in many other countries. I choose not to be cynical about current events and to be optimistic that the divisions can be corrected.
Do you believe others should be granted those rights? How about people who support the evil orange man? How about the 6th amendment. That's the one that guarantees a speedy and public trial by an IMPARTIAL jury. How about we inform the prisoners of the nature and cause of the accusation and allow them to confront the witnesses? How about letting them see the evidence against them?
Are you aware that every square inch of public space in the Capitol has security cameras? That means that everything anyone in the Capitol did on 1/6 is on video tape. How can it possibly take more than a year and a half to charge the people being held for some crime, any crime? Or, are they still looking for the crime and that is why the people being held without bail for trespassing have not yet been charged? Is this Russia where Stalin's people claimed - "show me the man and I'll show you the crime". Here in the US, we used to be innocent until proven guilty. We used to be entitled to bail unless we were a flight risk. Hell, we release people accused of attacking others (with video evidence) without bail. And yet, there is something so dangerous about the people who entered the Capitol on 1/6 that we have to deny them basic rights. What is it? Is it because we want them to turn on that evil orange man and say that Trump is the one that made them do it?
Has any single person arrested because of 1/6 been charged with Insurrection? The answer is NO because there was no insurrection regardless of what the Democrats keep telling you. They can say whatever they want. They will repeat it until the cows come home. They will conduct kangaroo courts. They want to impeach Trump. Holding political prisoners is to punish them for supporting Trump and make every other Trump supporter think twice about supporting that evil orange man.
How about those feckless pieces of dog do do Republicans who are allowing the Democrats to keep political prisoners?
How about American citizens who are not marching in the street every day in front of Congress to protest this travesty of justice? Maybe the tactic worked. Maybe people are actually afraid to march. Maybe they're afraid they'll be arrested on some bogus charge for protesting?
Do you believe others should be granted those rights? How about people who support the evil orange man? How about the 6th amendment. That's the one that guarantees a speedy and public trial by an IMPARTIAL jury. How about we inform the prisoners of the nature and cause of the accusation and allow them to confront the witnesses? How about letting them see the evidence against them?
Of course, I believe everyone should be granted the rights guaranteed by the constitution.
President Trump is not evil or orange. I know what the Sixth Amendment guarantees. Unfortunately, the wheels of justice turn slowly for everyone, even though the framers preferred speedy trials.
I believe the voir dire process gives everyone the ability to have an impartial jury in a trial. The last two questions above (inform and confront) apply to trials, not congressional hearings. This thread seems to be about the fairness of the 1/6 congressional hearing. Congress has and should exercise its responsibility to oversee the actions of the executive branch. The SCOTUS confirmed this responsibility many years ago. This is a critical part of our checks and balances system. As an obscure example, Senator Ted Cruz, from my great state, had the right to haul the FBI into an oversight hearing concerning the Ray Epps matter. Because the FBI did not confirm or deny Mr. Epps's involvement in the 1/6 event does not mean he is on the FBI payroll. Who knows the reason for the FBI's response to the Senator's questions? I suspect Mr. Epps was offered immunity or shelter from public exposure in exchange for cooperation on higher-profile cases. That's only speculation on my part. The material the 1/6 committee gathers will be turned over to the DOJ. If the Attorney General feels the evidence is strong enough to charge one or more people, then they will have the protection of the Sixth Amendment. They will receive a fair trial. It will surely not be speedy.
Why no investigation by the current Congress into the Biden administration's purposeful avoidance of enforcing immigration laws?
Biden signed Executive Orders that established equity racism as a criteria for making federal decisions in violation of equal rights. Where is that Congressional oversight?
Do you believe others should be granted those rights? How about people who support the evil orange man? How about the 6th amendment. That's the one that guarantees a speedy and public trial by an IMPARTIAL jury. How about we inform the prisoners of the nature and cause of the accusation and allow them to confront the witnesses? How about letting them see the evidence against them?
Absolutely. Even murderers, rapists, child molesters, you name it, they're entitled to a whole slew of protections. Do you know how many millions of your tax dollars are going to Federal Defenders to represent each and every defendant that has been charged no matter how minor their charges may be?
Speedy trials are often waived by the defendant or are subject to various pauses due to certain circumstances such as some motion practices. A speedy trial date often favors the prosecution as they have already done their investigation prior to bringing charges, while by waiving that right defendants hope victims lose interest, witnesses move, memories fade, etc.
Are you aware that every square inch of public space in the Capitol has security cameras? That means that everything anyone in the Capitol did on 1/6 is on video tape. How can it possibly take more than a year and a half to charge the people being held for some crime, any crime? Or, are they still looking for the crime and that is why the people being held without bail for trespassing have not yet been charged?
Yes there is over 20,000 hours of videotape. That equates to just about 2 1/2 years of video. I don't know where you get the idea that those being held have not been charged with crimes. Many, if not most, of those charged are in those videos showing them committing the crimes they are charged with. Its a pretty steep climb to overcome video evidence. That's why many have pleaded guilty.
Not that I'm aware of and I'm pretty sure they probably wont. The criminal statutes regarding insurrection are rather vague hence the fact that they are rarely charged. The next best thing is seditious conspiracy which is sort of a parallel charge, or lesser included, to insurrection . There are some defendants that have already pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy.
If you really need proof that all the defendants were charged you can read all the charging documents, which include charges for illegal guns, you can find them here . . .https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases
Senator Ted Cruz, from my great state, had the right to haul the FBI into an oversight hearing concerning the Ray Epps matter. Because the FBI did not confirm or deny Mr. Epps's involvement in the 1/6 event does not mean he is on the FBI payroll. Who knows the reason for the FBI's response to the Senator's questions?
That is one of the events that gave rise to, or fed the fire, in the Epps conspiracy theory. The reason for the non-answer is that it is DOJ, FBI, and any other LE Organization's standard policy is to not comment on active investigations. Nothing nefarious.
So, being held without being charged with a crime and without bail for 1.5 years is "fair"? I think you might want to get your head out of the sand. If 95% of the jury pool voted for Biden or Hillary, they start out being biased. Then you top that off with the media lies and the kangaroo court being presented on national TV insisting there was an "insurrection". What is the likelihood of finding a single unbiased juror? Five percent at best. So, in your "fair" trial, you would be lucky to get half a vote in your favor. All requests for a change of venue have been denied.
It is not speedy because they are still looking for the crime Either charge the people or let them go. In what Democratic country are political prisoners kept uncharged, without bail?
Do you know how many millions of your tax dollars are going to Federal Defenders to represent each and every defendant that has been charged no matter how minor their charges may be?
How many of my tax dollars are being spent to represent the 1/6 defendants? I'm going to guess that despite the government working to bankrupt them, they're on their own. Only destitute people get public defenders. Ordinary citizens are expected to bankrupt themselves and their families and make themselves and their families homeless to fight the government. That is why so many people just plead guilty. They can afford to spend two weeks in jail. They cannot afford to defend themselves even if they are innocent.
So, you're saying that the 1/6 defendants who committed the crime of being in the Capitol building without permission agreed to spend an indefinite amount of time in jail, loose their jobs and perhaps their families and spend thousands of dollars on legal representation rather than get out of jail immediately with a small fine for trespassing? I guess they're pretty stupid.
Not that I'm aware of and I'm pretty sure they probably wont. The criminal statutes regarding insurrection are rather vague hence the fact that they are rarely charged.
So, none of the "criminals" have been charged with insurrection. Why are the Democrats allowed to lie about that fact to the American public? Why have they spent MILLIONS of my dollars conducting bogus, biased hearings that will NEVER, EVER lead to a charge of insurrection for anyone? What is their purpose other than as a third impeachment of the evil orange man?
Many, if not most, of those charged are in those videos showing them committing the crimes they are charged with.
I wonder why we have never seen a single frame of official video showing anyone committing any crime at all. All we see are the videos of tourists wandering the halls of Congress admiring the artwork and taking selfies. Oh, except for the video of the murder. We do see the cop shooting an unarmed woman at point blank range with NO WARNING. Except for that crime, which went unpunished because black cops can't be charged with murder if the criminal is white. Only white cops that shoot armed criminals can be charged with murder because that is a crime.
Thanks for the link to the cases. Here's the latest entry:
Code:
1:21-cr-281 REVLETT, Jordan T
Entering and Remaining in a Restricted Building
Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building
Violent Entry and Disorderly Conduct in a Capitol Building
Parading, Demonstrating, or Picketing in a Capitol Building
Revlett, Jordan - Complaint & Statement of Facts
Revlett - Information
Revlett Plea Agreement
Revlett Statement of Offense
KENTUCKY, Owensboro
Arrested 1/25/21. Information filed 4/6/2021.
Pleaded guilty 1/14/22.
Sentenced 7/7/22 to 14 days in jail, 12 months of probation, 80 hours of community service, $500 restitution.
July 7, 2022
Here's the newest entry. I couldn't tell from the documents how long this person spent in jail or when he was charged. That might be this date - 4/6/2021.
Arrested 1/25/21. Pleaded guilty 1/14/22.
Sentenced 7/7/22 to 14 days in jail, 12 months of probation, 80 hours of community service, $500 restitution.
If he was incarcerated without bail from 1/25/21 to 7/7/22, don't you think that was a little excessive given the actual charges and final sentence. Even if he was only in jail until 4/6/21 which seems unlikely given the other dates, that was over the top.
There is no way to tell exactly who is left in jail or what they might be charged with. I'm pretty sure given the penalty, no sane person would refuse to plead out immediately and be done with the whole thing.
Here's the newest entry. I couldn't tell from the documents how long this person spent in jail or when he was charged. That might be this date - 4/6/2021.
Arrested 1/25/21. Pleaded guilty 1/14/22.
Sentenced 7/7/22 to 14 days in jail, 12 months of probation, 80 hours of community service, $500 restitution.
He was arrested and released 1/25/21. Same day Pat. Probably within a few hours.
Here's his appearance bond. And no, he did not have to put up $25,000. He just promises to pay it if he doesn't show up.
Did you know he won 4th place in the sexiest farmer in Kentucky?
I believe I read that there were only about 70 people who were held out of the 800+ arrested. My guess would be they have lengthy records and/or a history of defaulting on court dates. Most of the arrested were released on PR.
I wonder why we have never seen a single frame of official video showing anyone committing any crime at all. All we see are the videos of tourists wandering the halls of Congress admiring the artwork and taking selfies.
I've actually seen plenty of Fox video showing people destroying property on Jan 6th. (Of course the totality of violence and property destruction propagated by BLM compared to the totality of property destruction propagated by Jan 6th-ers is a million to one).
The only question that remains is the video that show capitol police waving people forward.
That's the video that you ONLY see on Fox, not all the other networks. That's why it's called "Fake News".
And actually, people have been charged with insurrection, more or less
An amended federal indictment charged five members of the far-right group, including Enrique Tarrio, its former leader, with seditious conspiracy for their roles in the Jan. 6 assault.
I was talking about official video taken inside the building. I have also seen lots of videos posted by bystanders shot inside and outside. There was the murder by cop plus breaking down the door and windows. Lots of shouting, lots of selfies. No damage except for the entry. Hard to believe that cost $1.2 million to fix. It's not like the demonstrators were throwing Molotov cocktails at the police or trying to burn down the building. We did see someone trying to steal Nancy's podium and gavel. The guys outside were showing off climbing walls and scaffolding. We heard about people who took computers and damaged property in Nancy's office but never saw pictures of that.
Why don't we see pictures of people inside the building deliberately damaging property or fighting with the police?
I believe they have shown some newly released videos during the J6 hearings. I wouldn't doubt they are not releasing surveillance system video at this time as it will probably be evidence in many of the more serious cases. They'll release it to Defense Attorneys under a protective order.
Here's a video which shows fighting inside the bldg. I think it starts with cops waving in the tourists like you've been saying.
I see someone being crushed because he was between the mass of people and where they were trying to go. No one was deliberately trying to hurt him. I see people walking and chanting. I see people threatening. I see people sitting in seats in the Senate chamber. How dare they? The "people" sitting where their "masters" sit And, remarkably, I see the murder of Ashley Babbitt. I guess the 1/6 commission is proud of that murder of the unarmed woman. Where are the people beating police and damaging property?
Most of the clips have been shown many times. The only one I haven't seen is the cop being crushed against the building.
Please compare this with BLM and Antifa rioters burning cop cars and courthouses and police stations and throwing hard objects at the police deliberately trying to injure them.
Please compare this with BLM and Antifa rioters burning cop cars and courthouses and police stations and throwing hard objects at the police deliberately trying to injure them.
And the oft-repeated comparison only KEEPS GROWING more gaping! They are STILL doing it, they did it after Roe. They did it in Phoenix a week or two ago, Senate had to go to a secure room just for their safety - crowd almost opened the doors.
I mean this Jan 6th obsession is a moby dick captain if I ever saw one.
Ever see the photo of Ray Epps and John Sullivan? John Sullivan was the Antifa guy who was allowed to take a video inside the capital of the riot and was a CNN star for about five minutes. I'm sure it can be explained away easily.
It makes no sense to me to try to ascertain what these people were saying at that moment. If their actions violated laws, then they should be prosecuted. It does not matter what their stripes were; if they broke the law, they should be prosecuted. Who cares if they are MAGA, BLM, or Antifa? Who dreamed up these stupid names anyway?
It makes no sense to me to compare one bad thing to another bad thing and try to justify the first with the latter. That's the same stupid logic our children use. "Johnny down the street was shooting his BB gun at the neighbor's dog. Why am I getting in trouble for shooting my BB gun at his cat?" I'm not buying this stupid logic.
What disturbs me the most is how Americans resolve conflict. We could meet, discuss issues and try to understand the POV of the other side. Instead, we riot, protest, attack, and shoot each other. What is happening here?
"What a field day for the heat (Ooh ooh ooh)
A thousand people in the street (Ooh ooh ooh)
Singing songs and they carrying signs (Ooh ooh ooh)
Mostly say, 'Hooray for our side' (Ooh ooh ooh)"
What disturbs me the most is how Americans resolve conflict. We could meet, discuss issues and try to understand the POV of the other side. Instead, we riot, protest, attack, and shoot each other. What is happening here?
This presupposes that Democrats (and Republicans too) are even interested in meeting to resolve conflict. Biden, in his inauguration speech disingenuously spoke of unifying this nation. Yet from the very moment he assumed office, Biden declared "war" on those who did not vote for him. One manifestation of this has been reigniting racism by promoting racist policies under the guise of "equity". Democrats no longer believe in equal rights.
The sole purpose of the Jan. 6th Committee manufacture (fictional) guilt, not to discuss issues and try to understand the POV of the other side.
Another manifestation, Biden instead of acknowledging the Supreme Court as an independent judicial body has begun a tirade of accusing the Court of being an extremist unconstitutional body. It is not the job of the Court to rubber stamp Democratic policies. The Presidential approach would be to thank the Court and then go on to formulate a law that would comply with the Constitution.
White House correspondent Peter Doocy pressed press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre on the protesters who assembled outside a steakhouse where Justice Brett Kavanaugh was dining.
Video EmbedPresident Joe Biden issued a statement slamming Thursday's Supreme Court ruling that limits the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to regulate power plants' greenhouse gas emissions.The 6-3 ruling delivers a blow to Democratic and environmental groups that want the agency to...
Victor Davis Hanson of the Hoover Institute discusses intimidation of Supreme Court justices following the Dobbs decision on 'Tucker Carlson Tonight.'
video.foxnews.com
Don't forget Schumer's attack on the Court.
Democrats, in their religious zeal are imposing the "green new deal". They have no interest in negotiation or compromise; they are on a quest where the ends justify the means. All for our benefit, of course.
I've actually seen plenty of Fox video showing people destroying property on Jan 6th. (Of course the totality of violence and property destruction propagated by BLM compared to the totality of property destruction propagated by Jan 6th-ers is a million to one).
Below is one BLM/Antifa inspired riot that tends to get overlooked, but should be included in this thread. When BLM/Antifa riot, they attempt to destroy property. As @Pat Hartman notes: "Why don't we see pictures of people inside the building deliberately damaging property or fighting with the police?" From the videos that I have seen, the people inside the Capital building were wandering around like tourists. "Jacob Chansley, the so-called "QAnon Shaman" was sentenced to 41 months in prison for his role in the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol" which seems grotesquely excessive for being a simple tourist. Had this been a BLM/Antifa riot, the Capital building would now be a smoldering wreck.
Either charge the people or let them go. In what Democratic country are political prisoners kept uncharged, without bail?
And, remarkably, I see the murder of Ashley Babbitt. I guess the 1/6 commission is proud of that murder of the unarmed woman. Where are the people beating police and damaging property?
