This message was self-deleted by its author

[anobserver2]

This message was self-deleted by its author (anobserver2) on Fri Jul 12, 2024, 09:06 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[GeorgeGist]

2. Rubbish.

[Fortinbras Armstrong]

12. No, your attempt to say

We don't know where he got his income, therefore no Miranda rights argument is rubbish. The two are wholly unconnected, and it is up to you to show a connection. Until you do, then you have no actual argument.

[Fortinbras Armstrong]

24. So what?

It still does not justify your desire to scrap the Fifth Amendment for reasons of expediency.

The magnificent voice of Barbara Jordan saying "My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete; it is total. And I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction, of the Constitution." just thundered in my head.

[jehop61]

31. Thought you guys were Progressives

Those calling for no Miranda warnings to the younger brother, because.....??? The man is a US Citizen. He has the right to all the protections we give to any criminal in this country. So many are sounding like the repubs and trying to violate the Constitution. It works, let it be applied, no matter how heinous the crime.

[bluethruandthru]

34. +10000 n/t

[malaise]

39. Are you freaking serious? n/t

[pinboy3niner]

4. Bullshit!

There is no financial test for our civil rights.

[pinboy3niner]

11. Yes, I can tell you ABSOLUTELY that finances are irrelevant to rights

Civil rights are an absolute. Period.

[malaise]

40. +100,000 n/t

[In_The_Wind]

42. !!!

[leveymg]

5. You're confused. Miranda applies regardless of citizenship or withholding of information by a

suspect, or who's paying the bills, or the phase of the moon . . .

The only reason the FBI hasn't Mirandized him is to so that the interrogation doesn't go on-the-record. In other words, you're right, there are things they want to find out that aren't being discussed publicly - having to do with the older brother's trip to Russia, and what he did there, and the people who showed interest in him before, during, and after that trip.

[Warren Stupidity]

7. Yet another op advocating the abolishment of due process and constitutional law.

How readily, how eagerly, we volunteer to surrender our rights. How pathetic.

[pinboy3niner]

19. Again, completely irrelevant

How the hell would my income--or any behavior of mine, for that matter--invlidate my rights? If you're looking for an excuse for a kangaroo court trial, no thanks!

[Fortinbras Armstrong]

18. "I do not want civil rights surrendered."

Could have fooled me. No, it is quite obvious that you do want civil rights surrendered. You are saying "Until he answers questions, his right not to answer questions should not be observed." In other words, you would deny him his civil rights.

Here is a quote from Benjamin Franklin, "Those who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security."

[Chan790]

36. So...you want to deny him a Miranda warning...

until you get the answer to a question they cannot ask him under the public safety exemption without potentially tainting the interview and rendering every single thing he says to them inadmissible?

Smart. No...wait...it's the other one. Dumb! That's the word I was looking for. That's dumb!

[TorchTheWitch]

51. What do you care how he was paying the bills?

So what if he was supported financially? Do you seriously believe that there are no people in this country that aren't financially supported that are of an age where they could be gainfully employed? Geez, I went to school with tons of wealthy kids that were financially supported most of their lives by their families just because they were lazy, felt entitled, or couldn't get a job that kept them in the same standards they were accustomed to while growing up, so their families STILL supported them... and some are STILL supported by their wealthy families even now and despite being married with their own families.

Why in the world does being financially supported mean that the people doing so must somehow be involved in their criminal activies especially when these homemade bombs likely didn't cost a fraction of what their rent, food, cars, school, and all their other bills cost? What a ridiculous notion. Would you think the same of some kid in college that was having their bills paid for by their parents and was caught selling drugs that their parents must have been dope dealing conspirators along with their kid just because they foot their kid's bills??? Of course not. So why in the world do you assume that these guys who may or may not have been financially supported by family have even known about their bombing brewing terrorist good times much less been actually involved in it themselves? And just how the hell does this tie into the younger brother's Miranda rights???

[hlthe2b]

10. +1

Good gawd. I expect this attitude on Free Republic, but damn.....

[Chan790]

38. There is literally no way to inquire how Tamerlan T financed his lifestyle...

under the public safety exemption. It's astounding that people cannot grasp how narrow this exemption is.

It is in no way within the limited scope of questions that immediately assess an ongoing danger to the public. They can ask him are there are more bombs out there, they can ask him if he knows of other plots, they can ask him if he's aware of any associates of Tamerlan who may be enemy combatants who may pose an immediate danger, they can ask him where the bomb-making materials are. The second they ask him a non-exempted question like "Where did you brother get the money to finance his lifestyle" or even "Do you like school?"...everything he has said is rendered no longer admissible. Everything.

[dipsydoodle]

13. Maybe seem away to yourself

we've got quite enough conjecture here as it is.

[Fortinbras Armstrong]

21. You are being illogical

When you say, "The majority of Americans don't want to hear this kind of thing right now", you are using the fallacy of Appeal to Popularity. Saying that a majority of Americans are prepared to ignore the Bill of Rights does not make it the right thing to do.

In this case, the ACLU is acting properly.

[trumad]

22. Yeah---always expressing concern about our rights..

something the right wing and you seem to have a problem with.

[In_The_Wind]

41. +1

[Cooley Hurd]

23. oy vey...

The ACLU is not about "pouting". They're about protecting the Civil Liberties of Americans. Despite all the driven emotion around this case, we are still a nation of laws.

[BlueToTheBone]

37. Huh?

Go away. I want the ACLU there for every violation of my civil rights.

[Progressive dog]

16. ACLU is correct

[FedUpWithIt All]

20. I very much disagree.

Where does it end?

No thank you. Let them determine what they must within the framework of due process.

[bread_and_roses]

25. I know a young woman who has no visible income either ...

... because she can't find a job and her parents support her. She has not done anything criminal - but let's just say she gets picked up because someone who robbed a convenience store looks like her. So she should have no rights because she has no verifiable source of income and "someone else is paying the bills?" Eh? What sort of crazy is that?

So I guess by logical extension the more "verifiable income" one has the more rights one should have? And the less, the less?

Totally amazing what authoritarianism creeps around these days and tries to present itself as "reasonable."

[bread_and_roses]

49. You really don't get it, do you? (n/t)

[99Forever]

27. We need an unrec button..

... for crap posts like this.

[randome]

30. More likely his indulgent parents supported them.

Income is a non-issue.

Withhold Miranda rights for 48 hours, as allowed by law. Keep following the book on this one.

[alcibiades_mystery]

32. That's not really how rights work...

Thanks, though.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

35. LOL.

what utter nonsense.

[Fortinbras Armstrong]

50. So what if "others may be involved"?

How does this become an excuse to deny a criminal suspect his civil rights?

[dkf]

46. Supposedly his wife was supporting him.

If she thinks she can escape all of this she is sadly mistaken. She may have enabled this even if she did not realize it.

[treestar]

47. I don't see a connection

Dzhokhar gets Miranda rights, period. The exception to Miranda rights of public safety was being invoked for 48 hours. Then he will get his Miranda rights read.

Where Tamerlan got his income is a completely different question. I'm sure the FBI is on it. Obviously a major issue.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

48. Uh...

Rights don't work like that.