Toggle sidebar

Charges against Rick Perry are dismissed...

rog1187

rog1187

All-American
May 29, 2001
70,022
5,609
113
Washington (CNN)The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday dismissed charges against Rick Perry that alleged the former Texas governor abused his power while in office.
Perry, a two-time former GOP presidential candidate, was indicted by a grand jury in August 2014 after he first threatened and then carried out a veto that defunded a statewide public integrity unit in an attempt to force a district attorney's resignation.

Some libtards on here not pleased.
 
W

WhiteTailEER

Sophomore
Jun 17, 2005
11,534
170
0
rog1187 said:
Washington (CNN)The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday dismissed charges against Rick Perry that alleged the former Texas governor abused his power while in office.
Perry, a two-time former GOP presidential candidate, was indicted by a grand jury in August 2014 after he first threatened and then carried out a veto that defunded a statewide public integrity unit in an attempt to force a district attorney's resignation.

Some libtards on here not pleased.
Click to expand...

F'n GOP conspiracy ... do you really thing anybody in TX is going to find a GOP member guilty of anything? They are just gonna sweep everything under the rug to protect their golden boy.

See how easy that is?
 
DvlDog4WVU

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
47,209
3,292
113
WhiteTailEER said:
F'n GOP conspiracy ... do you really thing anybody in TX is going to find a GOP member guilty of anything? They are just gonna sweep everything under the rug to protect their golden boy.

See how easy that is?
Click to expand...
The charges were all part of some vast left wing conspiracy!

I can play too.
 
C

countryroads89_rivals

Sophomore
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
One point to be made, a grand jury saw enough evidence to indict. Anyone at all in this thread ever been indicted of anything ever in their life?
 
bornaneer

bornaneer

All-Conference
Jan 23, 2014
30,935
1,638
113
countryroads89 said:
One point to be made, a grand jury saw enough evidence to indict. Anyone at all in this thread ever been indicted of anything ever in their life?
Click to expand...

Well.... in the end the grand jury was wrong. It turned out to be one of those Ham sandwich deals. Looks like David Axelrod was correct.
 
Last edited:
O

op2

All-Conference
Mar 16, 2014
11,681
1,287
103
I can't believe he got away with fixing the PA Daily Number. It sure did take a long time for the charges to be dropped though.
 
dave

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,598
814
113
countryroads89 said:
One point to be made, a grand jury saw enough evidence to indict. Anyone at all in this thread ever been indicted of anything ever in their life?
Click to expand...
Any prosecutor worth a **** can get an indictment if they want one.
 
Airport

Airport

All-American
Dec 12, 2001
86,258
6,958
113
WhiteTailEER said:
F'n GOP conspiracy ... do you really thing anybody in TX is going to find a GOP member guilty of anything? They are just gonna sweep everything under the rug to protect their golden boy.

See how easy that is?
Click to expand...

The accused was arrested on DUI charge and resisted arrest. He asked for her resignation, appropriate concerning the video, and she refused. He had the authority to do it. She was guilty. This shouldn't even be discussed. She had it coming.
 
P

Popeer

Freshman
Sep 8, 2003
21,466
81
0
bornaneer said:
She may not be a "****" but it is well known she is a Democrat political zealot AND she operates in Austin. Are you familiar with the politics of Austin?
Click to expand...
Is there a point to your question? The indictments were thrown out because it was clear to the judges (one had already been dismissed by another judge) that the cases were politically motivated and had no basis in law.
 
bornaneer

bornaneer

All-Conference
Jan 23, 2014
30,935
1,638
113
Popeer said:
Is there a point to your question? The indictments were thrown out because it was clear to the judges (one had already been dismissed by another judge) that the cases were politically motivated and had no basis in law.
Click to expand...

The point was why she went after Perry. You correctly pointed out that the case was politically motivated. The mention of Austin is that it is very liberal.
 
M

mule_eer

Freshman
May 6, 2002
20,439
59
48
bornaneer said:
The point was why she went after Perry. You correctly pointed out that the case was politically motivated. The mention of Austin is that it is very liberal.
Click to expand...
Funny how all of the representatives of that liberal town are republican. Of course Austin is split into several districts that also encompass more conservative voters.
 
bornaneer

bornaneer

All-Conference
Jan 23, 2014
30,935
1,638
113
mule_eer said:
Funny how all of the representatives of that liberal town are republican. Of course Austin is split into several districts that also encompass more conservative voters.
Click to expand...

It's even funnier that all the recent Mayors of Austin ALL have been LIBERAL Democrats. OH... and how about the makeup of the City Council.
 
M

mule_eer

Freshman
May 6, 2002
20,439
59
48
bornaneer said:
It's even funnier that all the recent Mayors of Austin ALL have been LIBERAL Democrats. OH... and how about the makeup of the City Council.
Click to expand...
My point spoke to the gerrymandering issue. Austin is a liberal town. Texas is a conservative state. District lines were drawn to minimize the liberal voice of Austin. I didn't state my point very clearly tho.

I'll also add that I don't think that's solely a conservative thing. Similar things go on in liberal states.
 
bornaneer

bornaneer

All-Conference
Jan 23, 2014
30,935
1,638
113
mule_eer said:
My point spoke to the gerrymandering issue. Austin is a liberal town. Texas is a conservative state. District lines were drawn to minimize the liberal voice of Austin. I didn't state my point very clearly tho.

I'll also add that I don't think that's solely a conservative thing. Similar things go on in liberal states.
Click to expand...

Things like this are done by both Dems and Repubs. Who gets indicted is sometimes determined by who is in control.
 
dave

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,598
814
113
bornaneer said:
Things like this are done by both Dems and Repubs. Who gets indicted is sometimes determined by who is in control.
Click to expand...
Indictments are pretty much at the will of the prosecutor and whatever grand jury that prosecutor draws. Not sure where prosecutors are appointed vs. Elected but that would determine how corrupt it might be.
 
bornaneer

bornaneer

All-Conference
Jan 23, 2014
30,935
1,638
113
countryroads89 said:
Grand juries decide who gets indicted. SMH!
Click to expand...

You don't agree that prosecutors sometimes can influence grand juries? Also.... be careful shaking your head.....you might concuss yourself...especially with all that loose crap rattling around in it. [banana]
 
M

mule_eer

Freshman
May 6, 2002
20,439
59
48
bornaneer said:
You don't agree that prosecutors sometimes can influence grand juries? Also.... be careful shaking your head.....you might concuss yourself...especially with all that loose crap rattling around in it. [banana]
Click to expand...
Both are correct to some degree. Cases brought before grand juries are usually one sided. It's generally easy to get an indictment if the prosecutor wants to. It's not smart to push the envelope too much on that tho. You don't want a ton of cases you can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt. I should add that folks who are indicted often try to plea bargain instead of going to trial.
 
dave

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,598
814
113
mule_eer said:
Both are correct to some degree. Cases brought before grand juries are usually one sided. It's generally easy to get an indictment if the prosecutor wants to. It's not smart to push the envelope too much on that tho. You don't want a ton of cases you can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt. I should add that folks who are indicted often try to plea bargain instead of going to trial.
Click to expand...
Cases brought to GJ are ine sided because the prosecutor controls what is presented to the jury. There is no defense and they can withhold evidence. The only thing the prosector cant control is the questions asked by the jurors.
 
C

countryroads89_rivals

Sophomore
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
dave said:
Cases brought to GJ are ine sided because the prosecutor controls what is presented to the jury. There is no defense and they can withhold evidence. The only thing the prosector cant control is the questions asked by the jurors.
Click to expand...

Defense counsel is present at Grand Jury hearings. SMH again. And no, the prosecutor doesn't control what is presented to grand juries, the judge does.
 
W

WVUBRU

Freshman
Aug 7, 2001
24,731
62
0
countryroads89 said:
Defense counsel is present at Grand Jury hearings. SMH again. And no, the prosecutor doesn't control what is presented to grand juries, the judge does.
Click to expand...
I sat on a county GJ in Georgia for 4 months in the late 90's. One of the most interesting things I have ever done. Hundreds of cases were presented to us by the DA office under the jurisdiction of the county judges but they were not present. Neither were defense attorneys. Assistant DA's presented the prosecution case, GJ members could ask questions if needed and decisions to indict was made. Maybe there are other GJ's throughout the country but that is my personal experience.
 
dave

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,598
814
113
WVUBRU said:
I sat on a county GJ in Georgia for 4 months in the late 90's. One of the most interesting things I have ever done. Hundreds of cases were presented to us by the DA office under the jurisdiction of the county judges but they were not present. Neither were defense attorneys. Assistant DA's presented the prosecution case, GJ members could ask questions if needed and decisions to indict was made. Maybe there are other GJ's throughout the country but that is my personal experience.
Click to expand...
That is how grand jury works in WV as well. The prosecutor can pretty much get an indictment if they want or they could throw it if the wanted.
 
dave

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,598
814
113
countryroads89 said:
I think you are literally THE DUMBEST person I have ever met.

http://www.courtswv.gov/legal-community/court-rules/criminal-procedure/section1.html
Click to expand...
First, you have never met me abd frankly you won't.

Next. You should read your link. You call people dumb all the time and you don't know what you are talking about. In your link it says under the heading who is present in a grand jury. 16 grand jurors. A prosecutor and a witness and interpretor if necessary.

Stop while you are behind moron.
 
DvlDog4WVU

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
47,209
3,292
113
dave said:
First, you have never met me abd frankly you won't.

Next. You should read your link. You call people dumb all the time and you don't know what you are talking about. In your link it says under the heading who is present in a grand jury. 16 grand jurors. A prosecutor and a witness and interpretor if necessary.

Stop while you are behind moron.
Click to expand...
No, he's right, Dave. He said so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom