Jump to content

If Merit Garland isn't going to throw some high level person in the federal pen for sedition I want his DOR!

tantric superman

By tantric superman
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105545

Posted
Posted
Personally, I’m waiting for Brisket to get so despondent that he comes back around to a cheerful, jovial version of himself. 

I’m not despondent as much as I am fatalistic. We’ve chosen our path. We aren’t wavering from it, at all. We’ve selected self immolation, and there’s clearly nothing you, I, or anyone else can do to stop it. This is what too many of our fellow Americans want. So, this is what we’re going to get.

It happens. It’s happened repeatedly throughout history, from which we steadfastly refuse to learn. Humanity survives. Thousands, often millions of individual humans, do not….but que sera sera.

I’ve taught my kids to get clear of the metaphorical blast zone when it really goes to shit, the best they can. That’s about all I can do.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31671

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

Fifm

A question. Some of the crimes we saw happen carry a punishment that includes a ban from holding office, and there apparently is a DOJ policy of no public statements on investigations when elections draw near. Any thoughts on whether there effectively is an expiration date, or even a pause, on indictments in these cases, and if so, when that might be?

There's actually a policy not to comment on ongoing investigations, at all.  Except in extremely limited circumstances.

https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-1-7000-media-relations

Indictments are not communications per se, they will be made when they are ready. That is, when the government is ready to go to trial.  The statute of limitations, which is generally five years for federal crimes, is the expiration date.

I haven't looked it up, but I believe a criminal prosecution commenced before a President takes office may proceed under Jones v. Clinton.  So, we know they're not going to indict a sitting President, so it would behoove them to indict before the next election.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11365

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Satchel said:

The most significant takeaway for me was his expressed commitment to pursue 1/6 insurrectionists at all levels.

other than that, i guess, i was a huge yawn. it's a miracle i stayed awake.

which, when considering ag type things, is a good thing. i should be sleepy when the ag is talking.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6949

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

other than that, i guess, i was a huge yawn. it's a miracle i stayed awake.

which, when considering ag type things, is a good thing. i should be sleepy when the ag is talking.

Yeah. We’ve been conditioned to expecting headline grabbers from the AG. That’s kinda on us.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28825

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Satchel said:

The most significant takeaway for me was his expressed commitment to pursue 1/6 insurrectionists at all levels.

I was kind of surprised by his defense of the importance of voting rights and his description of how they’re being stripped away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...