Page 1 of 2
Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 3:21 pm
by JohnStOnge
Last night I was flipping back and forth between Fox News and MSNBC. On both networks most of the people I saw commenting on Eric Holder going to Ferguson, MO, and the Department of Justice being involved is a good idea because it would let people feel that a fair and unbiased investigation is being conducted.
I would have fallen off my chair if I'd been sitting in one instead of propped up in bed. I just wonder what would happen if a national poll were taken asking if people would expect an Eric Holder led Justice Department to conduct a fair and unbiased investigation in this case.
I know what I expect and it's not a fair and unbiased investigation. What do you think?
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 3:24 pm
by Skjellyfetti
Who do you think will conduct a fair and unbiased investigation?
A Ferguson police department internal investigation?
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 3:37 pm
by 93henfan
Holder is meeting with Brown's family today.
Fuck no DOJ can't be trusted. He's already shown that he cares more about negroes than justice right there.
Holder is inept AND crooked. Bad, bad combo.
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 3:41 pm
by JohnStOnge
Skjellyfetti wrote:Who do you think will conduct a fair and unbiased investigation?
A Ferguson police department internal investigation?
It's a difficult situation. But I'd trust some sort of State or local investigation a lot more than I'd trust an Eric Holder led Justice Department under these circumstances. It's pretty close to having Al Sharpton conduct it. There's not an objective bone in Eric Holder's body.
The main thing is that it's pretty naive to say that having the DOJ investigate this is going to re-assure people about the objectivity of the investigation. Not people who actually want a fair investigation and that's not the people demonstrating in the streets. Basically the demonstrators are a lynch mob that doesn't want an objective investigation. It's composed of people whose minds are already made up and only arrest then eventual conviction of the police officer involved is "justice" whether it's really true that the police officer committed any crime or not. To the extent that there are people out there who DO want a fair and objective investigation; I doubt that they're going to be assured of that happening by having this Justice Department do it.
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 4:15 pm
by ChickenMan
Hell no.. Holder only acts when it fits his political agenda. Forty FBI agents assigned to the case here, but not much DOJ interest at all in the below criminal behavior...
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 4:19 pm
by Pwns
Hell no.
I think Michelle freaking Bachmann would be more trustworthy and not any less competent.
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 4:19 pm
by CID1990
Skjellyfetti wrote:Who do you think will conduct a fair and unbiased investigation?
A Ferguson police department internal investigation?
I would trust Missouri's state level investigators more than either the Ferguson police or DoJ. I consider them to be equally biased, just to different ends of the spectrum.
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 4:20 pm
by DSUrocks07
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 5:35 pm
by JohnStOnge
CID1990 wrote:Skjellyfetti wrote:Who do you think will conduct a fair and unbiased investigation?
A Ferguson police department internal investigation?
I would trust Missouri's state level investigators more than either the Ferguson police or DoJ. I consider them to be equally biased, just to different ends of the spectrum.
I agree. I just honestly didn't know what the options are in a situation like this. Only thing is the Governor has shown some bias as well. Seems to be talking as though he's assuming the police officer is guilty.
There's a problem with this whole thing in that there is political pressure to just declare the officer guilty. Makes it very difficult for getting a scenario in which he is treated fairly.
And you know I'm not just saying that because I automatically take the side of police officers. I'm obviously not that type.
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 5:43 pm
by Ivytalk
Holder. WAFJ.
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 6:30 pm
by HI54UNI
I wouldn't trust Holder to walk my dog. There's no way I would trust him on an investigation.
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 6:47 pm
by CAA Flagship
No trust here as well.
But in reality, the only way we have a chance to prevent a huge shitstorm is if the DOJ is involved with a finding of innocence.
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 6:54 pm
by Baldy
You turn to the DOJ only if you want to get railroaded...
These are the same clowns who are in Ferguson.
Justice Department attorney Karla Dobinski posted on NOLA.com about Danziger Bridge trial, judge reveals
A veteran U.S. Justice Department attorney posted anonymous comments online during the Danziger Bridge trial in 2011, a federal judge revealed Tuesday as he ordered a new trial for the former police officers convicted in the case.
Karla Dobinski, trial attorney in the department's Civil Rights Division in Washington, D.C., posted comments on NOLA.com under the name "Dipsos," U.S. District Judge Kurt Engelhardt said in his order, which cited "grotesque" prosecutorial misconduct as a reason to grant a new trial.
The judge called Dobinski's posts a "wanton reckless course of action."
The order grants a new trial for Kenneth Bowen, Robert Gisevius, Robert Faulcon, Anthony Villavaso and Arthur Kaufman. All were tried and convicted of civil rights violations in 2011 for their roles in the Danziger shooting or cover-up. The case against a sixth former officer, Gerard Dugue, accused of helping write a fraudulent report, ended in mistrial in 2012, and retrial has been delayed.
The five officers who were convicted sought a new trial last year alleging prosecutorial misconduct, citing among other examples the revelations that then-prosecutors Sal Perricone and Jan Mann authored disparaging comments on Nola.com about defendants in several criminal cases, including the Danziger case. Perricone and Mann were not the prosecutors on the Danziger case, but were top officials in the office at the time.
The Justice Department's public affairs office did not immediately respond to a request to comment about Dobinski.
Sources close to an ongoing criminal investigation of misconduct in the U.S. attorney's office had long suggested there was a third prosecutor posting comments. But the identity of the third poster had remained secret until now.
In his order, Engelhardt said it was to his "shock and dismay" that on May 15 of this year, Dobinski's online activities were revealed to him.
Dobinski wasn't just any federal prosecutor. She was the "taint team leader," a veteran member of the Civil Rights division tapped to ensure the rights of a police officer -- in this case, Bowen -- were not violated during the course of the federal investigation. This was a special situation since the officer had provided certain information to a state grand jury that was off limits in the federal case.
The "taint team" was formed in 2008 when federal officials took over the Danziger Bridge probe after a botched effort in state court.
Dobinski's role was to help federal prosecutors determine what they could permissibly use, and the judge noted he relied on her testimony to allow in certain evidence against Bowen.
The DOJ.
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 7:14 pm
by travelinman67
Skjellyfetti wrote:Who do you think will conduct a fair and unbiased investigation?
A Ferguson police department internal investigation?
The one Yes vote...
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 8:45 pm
by SDHornet
Easy no vote...but then again I trust zero government entities at any level.
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 8:46 pm
by Skjellyfetti
travelinman67 wrote:Skjellyfetti wrote:Who do you think will conduct a fair and unbiased investigation?
A Ferguson police department internal investigation?
The one Yes vote...
I didn't vote.
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 8:52 pm
by Skjellyfetti
SDHornet wrote:Easy no vote...but then again I trust zero government entities at any level.
So, who should investigate this?
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 9:29 pm
by YoUDeeMan
Skjellyfetti wrote:travelinman67 wrote:
The one Yes vote...
I didn't vote.
People without spines rarely take a stand.
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 10:40 pm
by SDHornet
Skjellyfetti wrote:SDHornet wrote:Easy no vote...but then again I trust zero government entities at any level.
So, who should investigate this?
Why bother with an investigation, this has already been tried in the court of public opinion the second it went viral.
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 10:48 pm
by travelinman67
Cluck U wrote:Skjellyfetti wrote:
I didn't vote.
People without spines rarely take a stand.
Interestingly, research supports your assertion...
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2014 4:07 am
by ASUG8
Decidedly no. He and his boss showed their stripes in the Trayvon case already. Him showing in Mo. tells me he doesn't trust the locals or the state to "do the right thing".
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2014 5:10 am
by BDKJMU
Skjellyfetti wrote:SDHornet wrote:Easy no vote...but then again I trust zero government entities at any level.
So, who should investigate this?
Local & state authorities. Missouri is no different than other states. Local police shootings are a local & state matter.
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2014 7:11 am
by mrklean
The Jury will be 90% white. Fair and balance.................lol
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2014 7:24 am
by Ibanez
mrklean wrote:The Jury will be 90% white. Fair and balance.................lol
You do not know that. Don't be an ass and speculate. You shouldn't jump to any conclusion, we don't have all the facts.
Re: Do you trust DOJ?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2014 7:45 am
by ASUG8
mrklean wrote:The Jury will be 90% white. Fair and balance.................lol
Like the OJ Simpson trial with a change of venue?