Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Vincardog

(20,234 posts)

7. What has the decision on racial discrimination in the selection of the grand jury have to with it?

Reply to msanthrope (Reply #5)

Wed Mar 7, 2012, 07:06 PM

Mar 2012

Eric Holder maintains that no judicial process is required. The fifth amendment says he is wrong.
You keep wanting to side track the conversation from that point for some reason.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Groups Reject Holder�s Defence of Targeted Assassinations [View all] The Northerner Mar 2012 OP

The word "defence" is a dead giveaway gratuitous Mar 2012 #1

. Attorney General Eric Holder DID NOT outlined the statutory justifications for murdering Vincardog Mar 2012 #2

eric holder meet john yoo leftyohiolib Mar 2012 #3

The shit does not fall far from the bat. Why does BO support this nonsense? Vincardog Mar 2012 #4

election year catering perhaps,,, to the "war now" crowd leftyohiolib Mar 2012 #6

So, then, Alexander v. Lousiana was wrongly decided????? msanthrope Mar 2012 #5

What has the decision on racial discrimination in the selection of the grand jury have to with it? Vincardog Mar 2012 #7

If due process is not judicial then is it Angry Dragon Mar 2012 #8

Worse than a slope, we have fallen over the cliff. These are King Powers not Presidential ones Dragonfli Mar 2012 #9

K&R Solly Mack Mar 2012 #10