It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
Alright, I cannot say what the author of the article's reasonings were, why this could be relevant to the case, but this is my interpretation.
When a prosecution is presented, they must turnover all evidence. Now the federal government is going to try this case first. So the reasoning of why the judge was there, even if it was for a photo op, could be construed as business of the federal government.
BUT, with the President stating that he was there to see his friend, this does not allow a federal prosecution then.
It seems a lot of people in our government do not care about proper procedure when investigating or prosecuting crime. Procedures are IMPORTANT to not screw up the process. Just like the Sheriff to attempt to say that the vitriol had something to do with this heinous and vile act of an insane criminal. Just because he is insane does not mean he is not a criminal, IMO.
This will probably be the show trial of the century.
Remember ol Obama's statement in regards to the terrorist trials? Even if found not guilty they would never get out of prison. How is that cognitive dissonance working for everyone so far? By the way, one charge on the first terrorist trial. How did that one work out?
Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
Ah I see, so to you, no one has any political leanings, we all think the same about every issue, and absolutely zero threats were ever launched by citizens who align themselves on one side of the political spectrum against the other.
So basically the tone and rhetoric of the last two years according to you never happened is that right?
Everyone thinks the exact same on every issue, to you no one has a mind of their own, no one can lean left or right, and we basically are all the same mind. Is this what I am hearing from you?
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
It is a sham. A farce. Complete fiction. But, by all means, continue pretending if you wish.
Originally posted by EssenSieMich
Just for clarification. The reason that this matters is that unless it was official business the murder of the Judge could only be charged as a state crime, not a federal crime.
I is a Consitutional Scholar
Originally posted by Sinnthia
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
It is a sham. A farce. Complete fiction. But, by all means, continue pretending if you wish.
I guess someone like me that believes in more socially liberal concepts does not exist then because the government is hard to trust from year to year? I do not understand this concept. Why do I still get called a lefty, liberal, moonbat, if there is no difference between me and say someone who listens to Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity? Does this mean we can all hug and sing over a Coke together now?
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
I am going to restate:
Any "liberal" you elect is going to do just about the same stuff that the conservative choice would do. The only real difference between Obama and Bush is that they look different physically. Effectively, there is no difference. No matter how it works in theory, in practice it always works the same.
Quit being dense. If you honestly do not understand, ask in earnest. But a feigned denseness is not being truthful, and it makes the conversation worthless.
Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
But I wasn't talking about our elected officials, I was talking about the Joe Sixpacks out there in the USA. But apparently to you, no one can have ideological differences, and apparently to you everyone thinks the exact same. I am not discussing the politicians, I am talking about the people that for the last two years have made a big point of threatening lawmakers and their staff over things like health care reform, shooting at offices, and other acts of vandalism.
I take personal exception to being lumped in together with a group of people who think this sort of behavior is acceptable political discourse.
@25jamey
There is an underground resistance movement forming right now. We need warriors.
This group is based soley on ACTION!
We're preparing for a serious show of force.
Can you help us recruit?
Also, since most of you are using media as your source. Please give the source of information you are saying to be true, to their source.
Judge Roll had just come from the light of a Catholic Mass a and confronted the darkness of a madman.
Some two dozen people did stop in, collecting out front of a Safeway store. At 10 a.m. sharp, standing near a banner adorned with her name and the U.S. House of Representatives seal, Giffords began to greet the crowd. Among them were old friends, such as John Roll, a federal judge who put off household chores to go say hello after Mass.
Roll that often holding court in the criminal case United States border with Mexico, is being spent his Saturdays like most Americans. He went to church, then shopping, and go home. But when going home, he saw members of the House of Representatives (U.S. House), Gabrielle Giffords, was meeting with constituents outside the supermarket.