slug.com slug.com

3 6

How do you solve a problem like Ilhan Omar?
[thefederalist.com]

Easy, vote out Democrats.

SpikeTalon 10 Feb 27
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

3 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Democrats are going try to steal elections all accross the nation. Nobody could fix our voting system and it's easily corrupted as many have shown.

3

Maybe the people will vote out the looney Democraps.

I hope they do.

1

"How do you solve a problem like..." ?

Fill in the blank to accurately identify self-evident, self-confessed on the official record, treasonous criminals.

How do you solve that problem?

Once upon a time in America there was the law of the land.

Page 42
The Conviction Factory, The Collapse of America's Criminal Courts, by Roger Roots
Law Enforcement as a Universal Duty

"Law enforcement in the Founders' time was a duty of every citizen. Citizens were expected to be armed and equipped to chase suspects on foot, on horse, or with wagon whenever summoned. And when called upon to enforce the laws of the state, citizens were to respond "not faintly and with lagging steps, but honestly and bravely and with whatever implements and facilities [were] convenient and at hand. Any person could act in the capacity of a constable without being one, and when summoned by a law enforcement officer, a private person became a temporary member of the police department. The law also presumed that any person acting in his public capacity as an officer was rightfully appointed."

The Conviction Factory, The Collapse of America's Criminal Courts, by Roger Roots
Page 40
Private Prosecutors
"For decades before and after the Revolution, the adjudication of criminals in America was governed primarily by the rule of private prosecution: (1) victims of serious crimes approached a community grand jury, (2) the grand jury investigated the matter and issued an indictment only if it concluded that a crime should be charged, and (3) the victim himself or his representative (generally an attorney but sometimes a state attorney general) prosecuted the defendant before a petit jury of twelve men. Criminal actions were only a step away from civil actions - the only material difference being that criminal claims ostensibly involved an interest of the public at large as well as the victim. Private prosecutors acted under authority of the people and in the name of the state - but for their own vindication. The very term "prosecutor" meant criminal plaintiff and implied a private person. A government prosecutor was referred to as an attorney general and was a rare phenomenon in criminal cases at the time of the nation's founding. When a private individual prosecuted an action in the name of the state, the attorney general was required to allow the prosecutor to use his name - even if the attorney general himself did not approve of the action.
Private prosecution meant that criminal cases were for the most part limited by the need of crime victims for vindication. Crime victims held the keys to a potential defendant's fate and often negotiated the settlement of criminal cases. After a case was initiated in the name of the people, however, private prosecutors were prohibited from withdrawing the action pursuant to private agreement with the defendant. Court intervention was occasionally required to compel injured crime victims to appear against offenders in court and "not to make bargains to allow [defendants] to escape conviction, if they...repair the injury."

Oh, oh, oh, but I was told all I could do was vote for the next treasonous criminal to infringe upon natural rights, and then I'd be responsible for that criminals crimes because I stood in line to punch a button.

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:80337
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.