US Politics Thread 2021-24

[MaDef]

Originally Posted by mapuc

A question about your American prison system

Background for the reason to my question

One of my American friend on FB said that she would be enormous satisfied when Trump is dressed in Orange from top to bottom.

I was about to write following on her wall.

Only murders shall wear orange clothes, Trump will wear something else with an another colour, I don't think his verdict will be prison though-

Tried to find info on colour of clothes in American prison.

Only thing I got is how bad the American prison system is(This is NOT what I'm asking about)

Then I remembered this thread

Markus

No standardization per se, due to the different prison systems, you have City, County, State and Federal jails & prisons. the color of the jumpsuits are generally used to classify the type of inmate, such as violent offender, some one with mental issues, non violent offender, trustee, etc. So it depends on the facility and jurisdiction the prisoner falls under that will dictate the color of the clothes he/she is issued to wear.

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by MaDef

No standardization per se, due to the different prison systems, you have City, County, State and Federal jails & prisons. the color of the jumpsuits are generally used to classify the type of inmate, such as violent offender, some one with mental issues, non violent offender, trustee, etc. So it depends on the facility and jurisdiction the prisoner falls under that will dictate the color of the clothes he/she is issued to wear.

Thank you MaDef..

Came to think of it, it has been from movies and some documentary I've seen murders in orange jumpsuits.

Where would Trump be placed IF the Jury find him guilty on first degree and the Judge sentence him x years in jail ?

He will of course appeal this verdict.

Markus

[MaDef]

I couldn't say with any confidence, but my guess would be in one of the New York State (it is a state case) minimum or medium security facilities

https://doccs.ny.gov/system/files/do...ap-11-1-22.pdf

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

What you fail to take into account is he made those payments before he was elected president. You also fail to take into account he’s been out of office for over two years now. You also fail to take into account the feds and the previous Democrat New York DA had over six years to investigate the matter and build a case against him. As much as I think they tried to come up with a solid case and would have loved to prosecute him and take the victory lap, none of them did. Now some two bit crooked scam artist made headlines by making it a campaign promise ‘to get trump’ so he could get elected. I standby what I said about Bragg, he isn’t interested in serving justice he was interested getting elected and serving the democrat voters which got him elected and so the show must go on!

It’s another boondoggle and dog and pony show. As Dershowitz mentioned even if you had the best lawyers defending you, it may be near impossible to defend against such a frenzied mob. But when the sensationalism settles the victory laps are done and Bragg and his voter base have finished patting themselves on the back. Because it was a boondoggle from the get go it will be easily overturned later on appeal.

This one will likely go to trial in December so please hold your breath.

[Highbury]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Now some two bit crooked scam artist made headlines by making it a campaign promise ‘to get trump’ so he could get elected. I standby what I said about Bragg, he isn’t interested in serving justice he was interested getting elected and serving the democrat voters which got him elected and so the show must go on!

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I though Bragg had to put his case before the Grand Jury and they decided there was enough evidence there to proceed with the indictment.

Are you saying the Grand Jury was in on it with him or am I misunderstanding the process?

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Highbury

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I though Bragg had to put his case before the Grand Jury and they decided there was enough evidence there to proceed with the indictment.

Are you saying the Grand Jury was in on it with him or am I misunderstanding the process?

Did you just wake-up today and think this was first accusation against Trump or something? Evidence? Six years have gone by and nobody, not the feds or even the previous Democrat New York DA prosecuted. Bragg however won his election on the very public campaign promise to ‘get trump’. Considering the contempt many people have for Trump it would be naive to think everyone on the grand jury panel are innocent sweet impartial angels. Court venue matters, a lot.

Bragg only needed a simply majority of the jury panel of laypersons to agree with him in order to file the formal accusation and make a name for himself. Since it’s not a trial, there is no defense team present, only Bragg’s side of the story is presented and any dissenting opinion of the minority group is not heard and does not matter in slightest.

In this country the accused is still presumed innocent until a trial (not indictment headlines) prove otherwise.

And so the show gets to go on and on and on and on.

In practice, grand juries generally rubber-stamp the wishes of prosecutors; this, together with the cost of the grand jury, has led some nations to abolish or seriously restrict its operation. In England the grand jury was abolished partially in 1933 and completely in 1948. In the United States the right to a grand-jury indictment for serious crimes is safeguarded in federal courts by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. But the federal criminal code permits prosecutors to initiate all cases except those involving capital crimes if the accused waives indictment by a grand jury. Waivers are frequent, and most prosecutions of even serious offenses in the federal courts are thus initiated by prosecutors. The Supreme Court has held that the grand jury requirement in the Fifth Amendment does not require state courts to use grand juries. Because of this, some U.S. states have abolished the grand jury and many others have significantly limited its use. These states, subject to various regulations, authorize charges of serious crimes through an instrument known as an information without review by grand juries.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/grand-jury

BOONDOGGLE

[Skybird]

Like Germany did in Russia and France/EU/Germany do in China, now Tesla is doing. Musk wants to build a huge battery factory in China - within the middle of an American tech containment effort by the US government.


Batteries are key products, and not just any product.



His recent Twitter stunts also show quite clearly whose side he is standing on. Free speech it is not, America neither.

[Buddahaid]

Dominion's lawsuit against FOX starts next week on the 17th. It should be interesting.

[Buddahaid]

The judge for the E Jean Carroll civil rape and defamation trial has confirmed the jury will be anonymous due to Trump's public attacks on current trial personnel in other trials. There were no objection's back in March about this, but now there are because even the lawyers will not know the jury. Too bad losers.

[Rockstar]

The judge for the E Jean Carroll civil rape and defamation trial has confirmed the jury will be anonymous due to Trump's public attacks on current trial personnel in other trials. There were no objection's back in March about this, but now there are because even the lawyers will not know the jury. Too bad losers.

This is how a jury panel gets to be 'in on it'. With such contempt for the accused what do think the outcome would be if people who think like this were arbitrarily selected for an anonymous Blue Ribbon jury panel?

It's frightening there are so many people so easily lead around by the nose by divisive foreign influences who would have them overthrow our Constitution and due process which is the idea that the state should treat everyone fairly and respect their legal rights. The same losers are prepared to throw out the Sixth Constitutional Amendment which gives defendants the right to a fair trial by an impartial jury of their peers.

We should be proud of our institutions and strengthen them not tear down just to score political points.

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

This is how a jury panel gets to be 'in on it'. With such contempt for the accused what do think the outcome would be if people who think like this were arbitrarily selected for an anonymous Blue Ribbon jury panel?

It's frightening there are so many people so easily lead around by the nose by divisive foreign influences who would have them overthrow our Constitution and due process which is the idea that the state should treat everyone fairly and respect their legal rights. The same losers are prepared to throw out the Sixth Constitutional Amendment which gives defendants the right to a fair trial by an impartial jury of their peers.

We should be proud of our institutions and strengthen them not tear down just to score political points.

Neither the prosecution nor the defense raised any objections when the judge asked them how they felt about it days before the decision. The reason for it is Trump's attacks against other courts and family members of those courts. All Il Douche's doing so he can argue about having a biased jury while it's of his own making.

[Rockstar]

Actually the jury will be selected as usual by the attorney’s on record the only exception being the identity of the jurors will remain guarded. Everybody knows that, it has nothing to with blue ribbon panels.

But if we can’t keep SCOTUS decisions, intel on Ukraine, or our own presidents security measures in Ireland secret. I don’t think the jurors identity has a snowballs chance in hell of remaining anonymous either. In fact looking into my crystal ball I’m betting that will be the next big drama headline Blue Anon will blame Q Anon and vice versa and so forth and so on. I already ordered extra popcorn.

[August]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Actually the jury will be selected as usual by the attorney’s on record the only exception being the identity of the jurors will remain guarded. Everybody knows that, it has nothing to with blue ribbon panels.

But if we can’t keep SCOTUS decisions, intel on Ukraine, or our own presidents security measures in Ireland secret. I don’t think the jurors identity has a snowballs chance in hell of remaining anonymous either. In fact looking into my crystal ball I’m betting that will be the next big drama headline Blue Anon will blame Q Anon and vice versa and so forth and so on. I already ordered extra popcorn.

Remember when that Dem journalist was caught chasing after the juror bus in the Rittenhouse trial so he could out their identities to NBCs Antifa buddies?

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by August

Remember when that Dem journalist was caught chasing after the juror bus in the Rittenhouse trial so he could out their identities to NBCs Antifa buddies?

Keeping the jurors identity anonymous in the Rittehouse case wasn’t because anyone feared what Rittenhouse might say or do. Nor do I believe Trump is the real reason in this case either. It’s to protect them from all the obsessed hateful, malignant, ambulance chasers, kooks and crazies out there on both sides of the spectrum. But I’m sure they’ll still find a way to blame it on Trump.

[Buddahaid]

Tell that to Alvin Bragg who received another threatening letter with powder in it today.