Nuremberg was not about holding low level foot soldiers accountable. They paid a price, for sure, but it was the leaders who were publicly shamed
It would be a perversion of justice of the highest order if we prosecuted hundreds of people for participating in violent insurrection, but let the mastermind & ring leader skate to a life of luxury & golf every day.
No ONE in America has been better at evading justice & no
Nuremberg was not about holding low level foot soldiers accountable. They paid a price, for sure, but it was the leaders who were publicly shamed
Imagine if Hitler had survived the allied liberation. Do you think ANYONE IN THE WORLD would have intimated he be let him go & allowed to retire in peace to promote global «healing» & «unity?»
Trump has the blood of 400,000 dead
Even the people who are suggesting that he be given a pass aren’t doing so because he isn’t deserving of punishment. They are doing so because they have a stake in preserving the world
The desperate, almost pathological need to preserve the mystique of powerful white men blocks out rational thinking about accountability & justice. The EXACT SAME mindset that justified giving
This warped mindset thinks Trump should be let off the hook because the humiliation would be too much for him, and his loyalists would get upset.
WHO CARES??!!
R. Kelly’s fans were upset about him being held accountable too. Somehow that didn’t seem to
America would NEVER be taken seriously again, and would lose all credibility in selling the merits of “democracy,” if we allowed the boldest, most lethal& dishonorable criminal in American
More from Pam Keith, Esq.
More from Law
There is a now-relevant parallel here to the difference here between matters before a judge & matters before a jury. Judges are far more reluctant to strike testimony or evidence if they are the only recipients of it, with the theory being that they are really smart about ...
law stuff & will know what they can & can't consider. For instance, there is a long-held rule that a fact witness can't make legal arguments, only a lawyer. So what will happen in a motion for summary judgment, where the entire proceeding is on paper, will play out like this:
1) Defendant makes a motion for summary judgment. It includes a sworn declaration from some fact witness.
2) The declaration includes all sorts of legal arguments about why the defendant should win. Often the declaration includes arguments the brief didn't even make.
Defendants (especially DOJ-represented ones) often do this to get around the word or page-limits placed on briefs.
3) Plaintiff moves to strike the declaration for its inclusion of inadmissible legal arguments.
4) Judge denies the motion to strike, on the grounds that a ...
judge is a sophisticated consumer of evidence & can choose what to consider & what to ignore, unlike a jury.
The legal fiction behind this impeachment exception is that Senators are also smart enough to know what to listen to & what to ignore. Now, that may not be ACCURATE, ...
To the extent that precedents matter in this trial, when hearsay has been challenged in past trials, it's been admitted if it's probative. And it's been noted that senators aren't *regular* jurors, but rather people of learning who can figure on their own how to weigh evidence.
— Ira Goldman \U0001f986\U0001f986\U0001f986 (@KDbyProxy) January 24, 2020
law stuff & will know what they can & can't consider. For instance, there is a long-held rule that a fact witness can't make legal arguments, only a lawyer. So what will happen in a motion for summary judgment, where the entire proceeding is on paper, will play out like this:
1) Defendant makes a motion for summary judgment. It includes a sworn declaration from some fact witness.
2) The declaration includes all sorts of legal arguments about why the defendant should win. Often the declaration includes arguments the brief didn't even make.
Defendants (especially DOJ-represented ones) often do this to get around the word or page-limits placed on briefs.
3) Plaintiff moves to strike the declaration for its inclusion of inadmissible legal arguments.
4) Judge denies the motion to strike, on the grounds that a ...
judge is a sophisticated consumer of evidence & can choose what to consider & what to ignore, unlike a jury.
The legal fiction behind this impeachment exception is that Senators are also smart enough to know what to listen to & what to ignore. Now, that may not be ACCURATE, ...