Only in your prognostication as to how politicians would behave but not with respect to what is just and right-and that is the important thing.
Posted on 04/11/2012 8:52:59 AM PDT by Outlaw Woman
By Eric (The RED) Holder and Zero’s Dept. of Injustice’s inaction against the NBPP, they are condoning their methods. Did Eric ever take the oath that I once took
“ that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” ?
His condoning the NBPP’s threats, is grounds for impeachment in my eyes. Do “We the People” have any politicians that can/will move on this or does it fall to US?
George Zimmerman stood his ground that night and he probably will stand his ground again. One day in court, maybe?
If the NBPP tribes come, I, like Mr George Zimmerman, will ‘Stand My Ground”. No threat, just Fact!
“Holder made a statement that if the evidence proves it necessary, Federal Civil Rights charges would be placed.”
THAT is going to happen and the lack of evidence will not matter.
Bingo. Zimmerman and/or his new attorney ought to be demanding the DOJ recuse themeselves from the investigation.
Good grief!!!
I didn’t realize had printed my post twice. I know I am going nuts!!!!
I lived through the 60s when civil rights laws were used often. In those caes and in the recent cases in NYC they all involved govt actors. Never private citizens.
Finally, a sensible solution is proposed. I knew I could count on you, Nathan!
The Special Prosecutor in Florida WILL definitely prosecute. There is no upside for her to unilaterally clear him based on facts or declarations by him of self-defense which some civil rights activists dispute.
On the other hand, she will pull a Pontius Pilate and symbolicly wash her hands of any responsibility if she elects to prosecute and hand it over to a jury.
The system is supposed to be even-handed and fair, without regard to public outcry, but in this case it seems that the public outcry of certain groups will tip the scales of Justice.
Then a jury will have to sort out the facts and not let itself be terrorized by threats of violence if they fail to find Zimmerman guilty.
Zimmerman, even if you are as free of sin as an angel, you are about to be toast, a sacrifice to the mob.
The version I heard was “Good, that simplifies the problem.”
pffft. No biggie. Duplicates happen all the time.
Holder's remark sent a chill up my spine. This is insane at so many levels.
But I wonder; what's a demagogue to do when he's trapped by his own rhetoric? Holder's run off at the mouth on this before. He's made promises he can't keep. His constituency expects him to follow through with something he knows is wrong.
Seems to me the smart thing would be to shift focus, and maybe that's what he's doing.
So, he opens his mouth again and makes another remark-- one calculated to undermine any hope of a successful prosecution. This is he he escapes becoming the object of his people's anger. He'll have a new rant: constraints on the ability of the AG office to speak candidly, or some such. At any rate, he'll no longer be in the middle of this mess and still retain his credibility to his constituants; that's not so hard to do after all. .
Of course, it's just as likely he intends to persecute Zimmerman, which means that he really is deranged.
Thank you. You are very kind and gracious. But I don’t let myself off that easy.
“He isn’t Jewish unless his MOTHER is Jewish. It has nothing to do with the father.”
You are correct.
Guess I was wrong...
I read he was raised Catholic. AFAIK Zimmerman can be just a German derived name anyway.
Only in your prognostication as to how politicians would behave but not with respect to what is just and right-and that is the important thing.
Not sure about acts of Satan...could be an interesting test case for the courts in the conceivable future.
≤}B^) -- I think.
Just a minor clarification, according to my finite understanding.
The prosecutor can indict the suspect, and then it goes to a grand jury.
(I hear that there are cases where a GJ need not be in the loop, beyond the obvious one of a plea bargain with the defendant, but this seems to be in contravention to the Constitution. But then, a lot of things going on these days are.)
It is up to the grand jury to return a true-bill or no-bill. If a true-bill, the prosecutor can then arraign, arrest, and take the defendant to court.
Anyone with clearer knowledge of this than I, feel free to jump in.
From everything I’ve read on this particular case, the prosecutor in Florida does not have to go to the grand jury if she decides to charge him with a crime.
Yeah. I eventually noticed that. I wonder what the rationale or justification is for bypassing a GJ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.