Progressive Politics

3930 readers

1414 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world

457

Epstein conspirator Steve Bannon: “We‘re gonna have ICE surround the polls…We’ll never again allow an election to be stolen.” (cdn.social.linux.pizza)

submitted 19 hours ago by CubitOom@infosec.pub to c/progressivepolitics@lemmy.world

98 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Source

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] FrostyTheDoo@lemmy.world 0 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Isn't it moreso that they can't get access to the evidence they need to successfully charge people?

[–] hector@lemmy.today 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

There is video evidence, there is no more information needed to make a charging decision, and the officers are identified. Not charging because of wanting more evidence is a cop out. An excuse not to charge.

[–] FrostyTheDoo@lemmy.world 1 points 38 minutes ago

I haven't seen that the officers were identified in Prettis murder. I'd be nervous to charge a federal officer who will have federal defense attorneys on video evidence alone when the fed has everything else I need. But I'm not a lawyer. I was just saying they clearly would like to press charges from what I've seen. I think they will, but are trying to make sure they don't get screwed in court first. They have open lawsuits to ensure evidence doesn't get destroyed by the fed. Why would they do that with no intent to charge?