OF THE
TIMES
If ignorance is truly bliss, then why do so many Americans need Prozac?
I’ve said here on SOTT that Tiabbi cannot be trusted. I haven’t explained myself properly and I’m not going to just yet. Tiabbi is, in my...
Hell take the 0.1 trillion + $ siphoned from the us citizen "federal effed up reserve" pissed away in ***aine, and you could build more than 30 of...
Think about this - the article says the base cost $2.5 billion - lets round that up to 3.... that is small potatoes versus the billions already...
Simple answer to the problem: Redshift is not caused by motion, it is caused by energy loss via friction. The assumption they have that all...
Nobody crunched the numbers ahead of time?
To submit an article for publication, see our Submission Guidelines
Reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views of the volunteers, editors, and directors of SOTT.net or the Quantum Future Group.
Some icons on this site were created by: Afterglow, Aha-Soft, AntialiasFactory, artdesigner.lv, Artura, DailyOverview, Everaldo, GraphicsFuel, IconFactory, Iconka, IconShock, Icons-Land, i-love-icons, KDE-look.org, Klukeart, mugenb16, Map Icons Collection, PetshopBoxStudio, VisualPharm, wbeiruti, WebIconset
Powered by PikaJS 🐁 and In·Site
Original content © 2002-2024 by Sott.net/Signs of the Times. See: FAIR USE NOTICE
Reader Comments
No we don't need testimony. Now we don't need a trial. No we don't need to waste anymore time.
What a f’d up farce.
I typed this before I sign on to SOTT.
I was just watching a hilarious Seinfeld rerun where Kramer’s pretending he’s got gonorrhea, Putty is telling Elaine she’s going to hell, George is leaving on a high note, and Jerry’s new GF believed her old boyfriend when he told her that she got gonorrhea,* from riding on a tractor in a bikini . So I’d been LMAO, and the recorded show shut down,
But then I couldn’t avoid hearing NBC stating:
- the Impeachment Trial is apparently on right away in the Senate; and,
- far more importantly, magically, as it were, the Democrats have come up with some greaseball/ scumbag, (out on bail re pending federal charges where his sentence is contingent on how much he’s willing to say that the prostituters want him to say; truth be damned) who seems to be providing 'new' claims at this far too late date
Indeed, it’s quite a bit like torture, (the poor bastard says what those who are in charge of his very life want him to say.) except that:
- the words desired by the scumbag’s life controllers are not answered by half gargled screams of ‘Sure! I sign or say whatever you want!’; and,
- the prosecutors of that scumbag’s case have already - and will continue to work diligently with him so that he’ll be able to tell a coherent lie. (in the biz, it’s called a witness ‘rehearsal’)
The most important thing here is that the week before trial, it appears that the prosecution just finally produced ‘new’ (sic) evidence that they’ve illegally and unconstitutionally not disclosed and held close to their vest to deny the defendant his right to a fair trial. (Violations of due process; both substantive and procedural.) [Guy's bombshell claim, infra.]
We’ve all heard about ‘Brady v. Maryland’, which is generally presented as ‘requiring the prosecutors to promptly hand over and exculpatory evidence.’
Well, even earlier in the prosecution of cases - and an even more fundamental right is at stake- the right to confront your accuser(s), know who they are, what they claim occurred, and most importantly of all, be advised EXACTLY what laws the Government claims that you violated. Logically, issues regarding omissions or ambiguities in the charging documents are routinely subjected to motions to dismiss. (I’d guess that this occurrs in about 80% of civil litigation and about 65% in criminal cases )
Here, I heard NBC claim that said scumbag/greaseball presented a NEW ‘bombshell’, by claiming ‘he wrote a note to himself’, way back when. (Talk about something easy to fake! Argh!) IMHO, if that isn’t alleged in the impeachment indictment sent from the house to congress, the whole damn charade should be thrown out on a motion to dismiss the entire case with prejudice.
All of these fancy words are merely sundry procedures created - dating back to the Common Law and detailed in the BOR - so as to ensure that prosecutors’ cases don’t get highjacked by political grandstanding, run by morally relativistic bureaucrats, or turned into witch trials. These items I've here discussed are not 'technicalities'; they
are(better said) ‘were’, well thought out, and routinely modified and fixed over the last five hundred years. IMHO, the law in the US (until around 1995) was the best designed and enforced that existed in this world in ‘known history.’After that time, however, we saw the USSC repeatedly help the police prosecutorial state (a wing of the DeepSh*tShate- “DSS” and the whole expansion of the MIC to include the police state, its law creations and punishments et al.) with the USSC supposedly making ‘procedural’ rulings which instead of focusing on ensuring fairness at trial, these rulings routinely and clearly work to ensure that a maximum of folks who are charged with anything will be convicted.
Does that sound like a reasonable and fair court system? No. The fancy words to describe it are, as above, violations of right to procedural due process (i.e., time to know what you are being charged with hopefully more than a week before your trial, as here,) and substantive due process: “What Crimes or misdemeanors has Trump supposedly done? No one’s heard a word yet.
The senate should grant a motion to dismiss, with prejudice. End of this insurance policy #2.
R.C.