And which opposition to the ruling class do you see appearing in the next 2 or 4 years that would purse anyone but the lowliest of perpetrators?

▲

ncallaway 10 hours ago | parent [-]

When the crime is murdering people in cold blood, I will take nailing the “lowliest of perpetrators” (e.g. cold blooded murderers) to the fucking wall.

Yes, I hope future administrators go up and down the chain of command looking at everyone who was involved in the cover-up, and charges them with conspiracy to commit murder, but a future Democratic administration will at least identify and prosecute the murderers themselves. While Republican administrations will conceal the identity of the killers and continue to have them out on the streets

▲

I-M-S 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Don't get me wrong, I'd gladly take any small victory. But thinking of it in terms of 2026 or 2028 just means you've kicked the can down to 2030 or 2032.

▲

ncallaway 9 hours ago | parent [-]

I mean, these will likely be state cases no matter what.

The question is, can the State of Minnesota put together enough evidence to convict these agents for murder and conspiracy to commit murder without the involvement of the federal government?

If so, we could see cases brought as early as this year.

If not, then the next question is can Democrats get them enough information by controlling one branch of the federal government. In that case, we could imagine a prosecution brought in 2027.

Otherwise, if we need Democrats to control the executive branch to get enough information it might be 2029.

I don’t think it will take long, because the State of Minnesota will have put the case together and be waiting to go. So the question will be how quickly can they get any necessary evidence, incorporate that into their case, and then bring charges.

▲

cucumber3732842 9 hours ago | parent [-]

>The question is, can the State of Minnesota put together enough evidence to convict these agents for murder and conspiracy to commit murder without the involvement of the federal government?

They'd have to fight the feds for jurisdiction and will unfortunately likely lose that fight.

	▲	ncallaway 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> They'd have to fight the feds for jurisdiction and will unfortunately likely lose that fight. That’s simply not how the system works. There’s no one assigned entity with “jurisdiction” over a crime. The state and federal governments are dual sovereigns and each are empowered to enforce their own laws. It doesn’t even violate double jeopardy for the Feds and a state to prosecute the same actions. The only thing that matters is if the state can obtain enough evidence that they feel they could secure a conviction before a jury of the shooter’s peers.

▲

direwolf20 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They were hot blooded murders

▲

platevoltage 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

pfffffff no they wont.