Doomsought
Well-known member
There is no such exception for this in the constitution.Isn't being denied a trial. While it is being denied a speedy trial, there are enough defendants that such can be justified.
Last edited:
There is no such exception for this in the constitution.Isn't being denied a trial. While it is being denied a speedy trial, there are enough defendants that such can be justified.
Don't blame the court system for it taking too long to get a fair hearing. The blame for that can be placed squarely at the feet of the legislature's failures.There is no such exception for this in the constitution.
The issue is that EVERY ONE of the political prisoners from Jan 6th should have been released pending trial. The specifics of their incarceration constitute human rights violations.
Courts that hate the conservative people and would love to throw them into prison forever. You see the problem here? Or is this some galaxy brain setup where we get to deny demonrats a speedy trial because "there's just so many of them!"?Yes, they should have been but that type of thing can also require courts to sign off on things.
Courts that hate the conservative people and would love to throw them into prison forever. You see the problem here? Or is this some galaxy brain setup where we get to deny demonrats a speedy trial because "there's just so many of them!"?
Assuming McCarthy abolishes this committee next month?The issue is that EVERY ONE of the political prisoners from Jan 6th should have been released pending trial. The specifics of their incarceration constitute human rights violations.
Sorry, not following closely enough. What's she got to prove?Reminder: the judge set an unreachable burden of proof.
Sorry, not following closely enough. What's she got to prove?
Even more, by strict reading of his statement it only counts if they took votes away from her. If she proves the Democrats gave themselves votes but didn't reduce her tally, the Judge's rules as stated say it doesn't count.Oh, so not just that the election was fucked. She has to prove that they intended to fuck it. That's... not great.
Probably still won't go anywhere, but at least we know the truthHowever biased the current judge is, this is all a matter of record. It has already been proven that someone intentionally fucked with the ballots so the machines could not read them. If need be, she can appeal, with all of this as a matter of record.
In recent news, the Judge ruling on the Arizona election case had ruled against Kari Lake.
His reasoning for this, as far as I can tell, is that while the election was a total shitshow Lake can't prove that it was screwed up intentionally and therefore no one will be punished and nothing will change.
Kari Lake gave as much proof as anyone conceivably can in this situation and still lost. Granted, she has said that she will appeal, but I doubt that this will go any better.
The Democrats, should Lake loose all of her appeals, will have learned that it doesn't matter how much they cheat or how blatant it is. They will not be punished as long as their fellow travelers control the levers of power. Which they do in many states.
Sure conservatives will be livid at being disenfranchised, but that won't matter. The left will still control the levers of power and the right won't be able to change that with lawsuits or elections.
The situation is grim and I see few options.