The reason this is possible is because the right to a trial is not guaranteed in Firestone (Sixth Amendment of the United States),
if do not like how this is, just add that to the bill of rights congressmen/wamans.
3 Likes
My only opinion on this is the following:
Do I believe this was handled improperly? Yes, completely, 100%. But it seems to be the only action being taken against the individual other than the DPS case he has on him currently. (https://trello.com/c/q10RR4md/259-lieutenant-gunnnerr). It is quite obvious in the video evidence provided in the investigation card that the individual broke several laws, including the the constitution, as he failed to provide his name and badge. I don’t understand why the Department of Justice has failed to take action. It can be seen that the courts felt then they should, which they may. I think this should be handled properly, and efficiently, to ensure proper justice is met in the situation.
Arguing seems to be fueling the situation instead of stopping it.
Speaker,
Joshernaut
5 Likes
So you went from saying that that wasn’t an official hearing under the GRP to saying that it is now. Here’s a screenshot saying it.
4 Likes
- But is the evidence the DoJ gathered LAW?
- Your actions would have been reasonable IF you had demonstrated that your “interpretations” of evidence were based on a previous statute. You haven’t, yet.
Once those two are satisfied come back to me.
4 Likes
The GRP disagrees
3 Likes
I already corrected myself in the Department of Justice Discord. This isn’t news.
The action I take based on my inquiry will ultimately reflect my interpretation of the evidence. Many people had a peaked interest as to whether or not a warrant would be issued. Warrants are powerful tools, and I wanted to use due diligence before issuing one against a law enforcement officer.
5 Likes
I didn’t bring charges. No charges have been levied against Gunnnerr at this time.
There was no “court” in the way you express it. I asked him questions. He wasn’t being accused of a crime. He wasn’t required to speak. He was not found guilty or not guilty.
No punishment has been executed. Even if I do issue a warrant, it will be the executive branch executing that warrant.
Please, sir, actually review the situation before commenting.
5 Likes
I do agree with you In the terms of the actions of said individual. It shouldn’t of occurred and Liam is naughty.
I’m just a concerned citizen who feels there needs to be a line somewhere you know. Thank you for everyone’s responses so far, it’s fantastic to see different points of view : D
7 Likes
I don’t see how Jef overstepped any bounds, anything he’s done up to this point is within his lawful authority prescribed by the Constitution and GRP. And for the lad who claimed “judiciary op1111,” you are a noob. Legit, here’s a summary of what Jef has done so far: “sir pls come to chambers to discuss your oopsies upon request to my office for warrant. pls explain. ok thank you.” A warrant hasn’t even been issued. And by the way, warrants are a really low grade thing compared to what they used to be. Back in my day, warrants were basically just an arrest on sight for x months (or functionally forever). Now they’re a one off, “take ur 45 minutes in jail for being bad” letters. Warrants have also extensively been checked beyond what is written through a few SC cases. The judiciary checks itself better than any other branch and y’all can step off. OP is the Governor being able to fire not only any state EB employee for any reason he pleases (literally, any reason), he can technically fire SO or FD through a legal trickery I’m not gonna describe here because I don’t trust Ash or Hec not to abuse it lmao. And that has been in the Constitution since I got here as a DCJ in August of 2017. Legit, that amazing, OP executive privilege has existed for at least three years and been used continuously, but no one has bitched enough to even meet this level of scrutiny. But a judge talks to someone in a formal setting and we all have a stroke.
6 Likes
Ah, yes! That is one of my favorite loopholes kept in the bag.
yea though danny pretty much covered it.
The inquiry was a chance for him to provide explanation to the video in order to assure that a warrant would not be issued without due cause.
3 Likes
I know he can fire them lol,
3 Likes
what? the judiciary cant just fire people. try reading it again.
3 Likes
Too bad congress isn’t component enough to fix that loophole.
3 Likes
Not really. The only power they have that isn’t either checked or initiated by an outside force is warrants, and as I discussed earlier those really aren’t that powerful anymore.
3 Likes
Congress can legit give and subtract their own powers with a cumulative 45 minutes of effort with literally no checks besides an election occurring every four months that often doesn’t actually go to voting.
3 Likes
Don’t forget that Congress could legally invalidate one of our warrants!
and there is a silly argument to be made that the Governor could issue an EO refusing to enforce a warrant but that one is a little more spicy
3 Likes
Congress can legally strike down court orders too, they just don’t know the powers they have.
3 Likes
Because our system is so broken Congress has unchecked God powers because they can amend the Constitution with no input but themselves. But as usual, judge man bad, judge man bad.
4 Likes
Have you noticed a pattern recently? Popular LEOs like WarriorMaster and Genner here get into trouble, get action taken against them that is given to everyone in a similar scenario ,but suddenly everyone and their mother is a fucking activist on “muh judicial OP” or “muh DOJ corrupt.” But yeah, the judges are the bad guys.
9 Likes
“I’m a bad guy” lmao
3 Likes