1 edit
@no1marauder saidYes there are still several liberals in the different agencies.
The cover up continues:
"FBI agent Tracee Mergen resigned after an attempt to investigate the U.S. Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) officer involved in the fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis earlier this month, The New York Times reports."
"Mergen, a supervisor, had initially opened a civil rights inquiry into ICE officer Jonathan Ross after ...[text shortened]... /www.newsweek.com/fbi-agents-resignation-amid-renee-good-probe-sparks-mixed-reaction-online-11411192
Didnt know this person…LOL she was the fbi investigator over public corruption in mn
The mn that has billions missing because of public corruption 😂
1 edit
Maybe you can understand this …from a leftist site.
“A federal law provides that state criminal charges against “any officer (or any person acting under that officer) of the United States or any agency thereof” may be removed from state court and heard by a federal judge. This statute does not prevent state prosecutors from bringing charges or from prosecuting a case. But it does ensure that the question of whether Neagle applies to this case would be decided by federal courts that are increasingly dominated by conservative Republicans.”
https://www.vox.com/politics/474434/supreme-court-ice-killer-minneapolis-minnesota-prosecution
1 edit
@Mott-The-Hoople saidI already told you that:
Maybe you can understand this …from a leftist site.
“A federal law provides that state criminal charges against “any officer (or any person acting under that officer) of the United States or any agency thereof” may be removed from state court and heard by a federal judge. This statute does not prevent state prosecutors from bringing charges or from prosecuti ...[text shortened]...
https://www.vox.com/politics/474434/supreme-court-ice-killer-minneapolis-minnesota-prosecution
no1: No, the State charges would be moved to Federal court assuming the defendant requests it.
@Mott-The-Hoople said"Public corruption" is exactly what the DOJ and FBI are exhibiting in the Goode murder case. They're trying to protect a killer for political reasons ignoring all existing standard legal protocols to do so.
Yes there are still several liberals in the different agencies.
Didnt know this person…LOL she was the fbi investigator over public corruption in mn
The mn that has billions missing because of public corruption 😂
@no1marauder saidAnd the defendant would be the fed dumbass
I already told you that:
no1: No, the State charges would be moved to Federal court assuming the defendant requests it.
@no1marauder saidSo you are cool with billions be missing?
"Public corruption" is exactly what the DOJ and FBI are exhibiting in the Goode murder case. They're trying to protect a killer for political reasons ignoring all existing standard legal protocols to do so.
@no1marauder saidThe fed has complete control over fed officers, just as I said.
No s**t, Sherlock.
1 edit
@Mott-The-Hoople saidYou said:
The fed has complete control over fed officers, just as I said.
Mott: a fed judge will rule in any case before it is allowed on a state level.
states cant just up and bring charges
You were wrong. Man up and admit it.
The case might be removed to Federal Court, but it would be tried under State law by State prosecutors with a jury composed of that State's citizens (unless the defendant opted for a nonjury trial).
1 edit
@no1marauder saidThe fed has absolute control…you are wrong about a jury too. A fed judge will decide.
You said:
Mott: a fed judge will rule in any case before it is allowed on a state level.
states cant just up and bring charges
You were wrong. Man up and admit it.
The case might be removed to Federal Court, but it would be tried under State law by State prosecutors with a jury composed of that State's citizens (unless the defendant opted for a nonjury trial).
If a fed office acts outside his official duties is what you keep running to…go look at my original statement.
“It wont play at all…Mn doesnt have jurisdiction to charge the fed officer for performing his duty.
I thought you knew the law…hmmm”
2 edits
@Mott-The-Hoople saidYou're goalpost moving; your original statement was claiming that Hennepin County couldn't charge Ross at all. "It won't play at all" is in response to my question about how Ross' "f***ing b**ch" comment would "play" to a Minnesota jury.
The fed has absolute control…you are wrong about a jury too. A fed judge will decide.
If a fed office acts outside his official duties is what you keep running to…go look at my original statement.
“It wont play at all…Mn doesnt have jurisdiction to charge the fed officer for performing his duty.
I thought you knew the law…hmmm”
no1: How do you think it's going to play to a Minnesota jury?
No, a Federal judge cannot override a defendant's decision to either have or not have a jury trial. It's a right enshrined in the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution.
1 edit
@no1marauder saidI posted my ORIGINAL statement…YOU are trying to put words in my mouth…fuk off!
You're goalpost moving; your original statement was claiming that Hennepin County couldn't charge Ross at all. "It won't play at all" is in response to my question about how Ross' "f***ing b**ch" comment would "play" to a Minnesota jury.
no1: How do you think it's going to play to a Minnesota jury?
No, a Federal judge cannot override a defendant's decision to either have or not have a jury trial. It's a right enshrined in the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution.
“No, a Federal judge cannot override a defendant's decision to either have or not have a jury trial. It's a right enshrined in the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution.”
Never said they could…just stick to what I said.
1 edit
@Mott-The-Hoople saidYou got caught, idiot. The context of your original statement is clear. And:
I posted my ORIGINAL statement…YOU are trying to put words in my mouth…fuk off!
“No, a Federal judge cannot override a defendant's decision to either have or not have a jury trial. It's a right enshrined in the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution.”
Never said they could…just stick to what I said.
Mott: you are wrong about a jury too. A fed judge will decide.
No, he won't.
You can stop lying any time.
@no1marauder saidShow me where any state has a right to punish a fed officer for lawfully performing his duty.
You got caught, idiot. The context of your original statement is clear. And:
Mott: you are wrong about a jury too. A fed judge will decide.
No, he won't.
You can stop lying any time.
You cant…and that is what my first post stated.