A question (for anyone really). Do you think that dividing the fights against various -isims makes it worse for the people involved, better, or no difference, compared to one overreaching human rights issue?
Obviously, I think it makes situation far worse. You need example? Here. Since we are on the game forums let's look at something close to the house. Remember that Voice Actors strike? VA were trying to get money from game companies and sympathy from the public. Not sure about companies (judging but complete silence on the matter - nothing major was won) but public they lost for sure. Why? They used the same tactic that article did - usurping general problem, as if they were the only one suffering from it. They literally tell things like "We are overworking and underpaid!" - Boo-hoo, who is not? Raze the hand someone who does not feel this way! Or "There are plenty of artists who work less but get much more" - Oh, cry me a river! What a shocking news! Someone gets more than me! And best of all "We are not stopping others from fighting for their rights" - Oh, really? How kind of you. So, why exactly should those "others" care about you then?
Just a one tiny example but this is what happens when people care about only their tiny group. It's like having a leaking pipe with hundreds of holes, but instead of replacing the pipe insisting of patching one little hole above your head.
Makes sense of course but often when something 'hits home' the tendency I think is to personalize it and fight for whatever that issue is (maybe not the best for all but it can get people fired up). At the same time, (for many) that one issue often turns into a much broader fight and understanding for the plights of others dealing with their own and separate issues (good).
EDIT: It's a good point @Mirandel brought up. I should probably say this is not a defense but just the way I see human nature reacting to events and dealing with conflict. When faced with immediate crisis or trauma we don't always feel better when hearing someone else has it worse.
Oh, I totally understand classical "if you do not fight for that group - anyone can be next", but somehow emphasis moved form "anyone" to "that very specific group and the rest don't count". It only provokes in-fighting, nothing else.
Take that "anti-trans" law Trump just signed. People yell "poor trans" - no! Not "poor trans", they are only an immediate victims. The broken law is the problem, the fact that someone - even if president - is allowed by personal authority to ban group of people for no other reasons but a stone age view of the world. People have to fight for a law, that prevents THAT from happening, the law explicitly stating "those physically capable do the job" (regardless of anything - color, gender, religion - whatever). But we are already so used to look only at very little parts and specific pieces, even the idea of bigger picture does not cross the minds. That really saddens me.
Because it's not just anyone who is being denied the right to serve in the military. It is also someone with those "little parts and specific pieces". First it was African-Americans, then gays, and now transgender Americans. There has never been a time when straight white men were denied access to volunteering for military service based on what they were born as.
Exactly what I am talking about - Divide and Conquer! So wrapped up in personal squabbles, no time to look around or - god forbid! - stop and think.
As to Arpaio. I know of a at least one sheriff in NC that has got somewhat wider attn. as well, when it comes to raids and profiling here in NC. Problem with ol Joe was he stepped into the limelight in a big way, then got backed up by a then candidate for pres. Not exactly the best way to carry out one's operations sneakily.
The crime for which Trump pardoned Arpaio isn't even the tip of the iceberg. Here is just SOME of what he has been up to in the last couple decades:
*One of his jailers nearly broke the neck of a paraplegic prisoner who was asking for a catheter *He once marched all his Latino prisoners into a segregated area surrounded by an electric fence as a publicity stunt *He arrested a local Phoenix reporter who was covering him, which ended up costing the taxpayers $3.75 million in a lawsuit payout *While laser focused on busting Hispanics, his department ignored HUNDREDS of sexual abuse cases, many involving children *He once staged an assassination attempt against himself *He hired a private investigator to harass the judge who found he had been engaged in rampant racial profiling *Attempted to destroy hard drives relating to his contempt case *One of the members of the inner-circle of his department was charged with possession of child pornography *All in all, his conduct as Sheriff cost the county more than $44 million dollars in damages over the years
And those are just the highlights. Joe Arpaio is an honest to god fascist who would have fit right at home in Nazi Germany, and that isn't even the slightest bit of hyperbole. He is one of the most evil figures in American public life. And his supporters don't like him in SPITE of that, but BECAUSE of that.
Thank you for doing the research. As someone who has relatives in Arizona I'd frequently hear about Arpaios egregious abuses of human rights.
He's always acted as though he is above the law and that the law applies to everyone else (but especially brown people). It seems Trump proved him right he is above the law.
Next he'll probably be offered a job in the Trump Administration in charge of Homeland Security or something.
A question (for anyone really). Do you think that dividing the fights against various -isims makes it worse for the people involved, better, or no difference, compared to one overreaching human rights issue?
Obviously, I think it makes situation far worse. You need example? Here. Since we are on the game forums let's look at something close to the house. Remember that Voice Actors strike? VA were trying to get money from game companies and sympathy from the public. Not sure about companies (judging but complete silence on the matter - nothing major was won) but public they lost for sure. Why? They used the same tactic that article did - usurping general problem, as if they were the only one suffering from it. They literally tell things like "We are overworking and underpaid!" - Boo-hoo, who is not? Raze the hand someone who does not feel this way! Or "There are plenty of artists who work less but get much more" - Oh, cry me a river! What a shocking news! Someone gets more than me! And best of all "We are not stopping others from fighting for their rights" - Oh, really? How kind of you. So, why exactly should those "others" care about you then?
Just a one tiny example but this is what happens when people care about only their tiny group. It's like having a leaking pipe with hundreds of holes, but instead of replacing the pipe insisting of patching one little hole above your head.
Makes sense of course but often when something 'hits home' the tendency I think is to personalize it and fight for whatever that issue is (maybe not the best for all but it can get people fired up). At the same time, (for many) that one issue often turns into a much broader fight and understanding for the plights of others dealing with their own and separate issues (good).
EDIT: It's a good point @Mirandel brought up. I should probably say this is not a defense but just the way I see human nature reacting to events and dealing with conflict. When faced with immediate crisis or trauma we don't always feel better when hearing someone else has it worse.
Oh, I totally understand classical "if you do not fight for that group - anyone can be next", but somehow emphasis moved form "anyone" to "that very specific group and the rest don't count". It only provokes in-fighting, nothing else.
Take that "anti-trans" law Trump just signed. People yell "poor trans" - no! Not "poor trans", they are only an immediate victims. The broken law is the problem, the fact that someone - even if president - is allowed by personal authority to ban group of people for no other reasons but a stone age view of the world. People have to fight for a law, that prevents THAT from happening, the law explicitly stating "those physically capable do the job" (regardless of anything - color, gender, religion - whatever). But we are already so used to look only at very little parts and specific pieces, even the idea of bigger picture does not cross the minds. That really saddens me.
Because it's not just anyone who is being denied the right to serve in the military. It is also someone with those "little parts and specific pieces". First it was African-Americans, then gays, and now transgender Americans. There has never been a time when straight white men were denied access to volunteering for military service based on what they were born as.
Exactly what I am talking about - Divide and Conquer! So wrapped up in personal squabbles, no time to look around or - god forbid! - stop and think.
Who takes the blame for that?? The people who implemented and supported keeping them out because they were black, gay, or transgender, or the people who point out that that was the reason??
Never heard of Joe Arpaio until now. If what is listed is all to be believed, i'm unimpressed at the cause the outrage. Did the left care when Obama pardoned the communist terrorist who led part of an organization that killed many people and set off over a hundred bombs across the country? Nah.
Bernie Sanders lobbied for this, by the way.
Credits to Politico, at least, who to my knowledge are the only left leaning source to call it like it is and not report on it neutrally to favorably, all important facts left out.
Never heard of Joe Arpaio until now. If what is listed is all to be believed, i'm unimpressed at the cause the outrage. Did the left care when Obama pardoned the communist terrorist who led part of an organization that killed many people and set off over a hundred bombs across the country? Nah.
Bernie Sanders lobbied for this, by the way.
Credits to Politico, at least, who to my knowledge are the only left leaning source to call it like it is and not report on it neutrally to favorably, all important facts left out.
A commutation is not a pardon. Commuting a sentence at the 35 year mark of a 55 year sentence (and also not absolving the person of guilt) is nowhere near the same thing as a blanket pardon of someone who hasn't even been sentenced for his crime yet. Lopez's case played out over a half century of battling interest groups. Arpaio was just convicted a few months ago, and his maximum sentence would have been 6 months. And, again, a judge never even got to sentence him for the crime.
Correct, wrong choice of words, regardless, he's out now. And the hand was even extended to him during Bill Clinton's term as well despite his attempted break out, so he could have been free much earlier. If you're a communist terrorist, the left got your back. We saw it with the real murderers and we see it with Antifa.
So Lopez was let out 20 years earlier after serving 35 years in prison? A person who police could not directly linked to any of the bombings he was considered to have organized.
And you are saying that is worse than pardoning a person who campaigned and financed for the current sitting president before his sentence, which could have amounted to little more than a fine and a person who has not shown any remorse for his actions and claims his case was politically motivated?
Which of the two above reeks of corruption more? That is the one you should be appalled at the most, if not, the corruption will just get worse.
Or are you saying two wrongs can make a right and it's no big deal because person X in history did MUCH worse. That isn't much of an argument either.
I'll meet everybody halfway here. It's always been kind of incomprehensible to me that a President has the unilateral power to pardon people with no checks and balances. Maybe we should have the Supreme Court decide on whether or not to allow these pardons. It can be in secret for all I care but at least the people would know that there's at least some kind of oversight on the legitimacy of these pardons...
Correct, wrong choice of words, regardless, he's out now. And the hand was even extended to him during Bill Clinton's term as well despite his attempted break out, so he could have been free much earlier. If you're a communist terrorist, the left got your back. We saw it with the real murderers and we see it with Antifa.
Name one person killed by Antifa.....while we wait for the answer, I'll go get a new titanium battery for my watch. In ten pages of a Google search of "has Anitfa killed anyone??" there isn't a single story (not even a fake one, oddly enough) that provides evidence of this occurring.
Correct, wrong choice of words, regardless, he's out now. And the hand was even extended to him during Bill Clinton's term as well despite his attempted break out, so he could have been free much earlier. If you're a communist terrorist, the left got your back. We saw it with the real murderers and we see it with Antifa.
Name one person killed by Antifa.....while we wait for the answer, I'll go get a new titanium battery for my watch. In ten pages of a Google search of "has Anitfa killed anyone??" there isn't a single story (not even a fake one, oddly enough) that provides evidence of this occurring.
Unfortunately, that doesn't mean it won't happen in the future. It's only a matter of time the way things are heading...
I'll meet everybody halfway here. It's always been kind of incomprehensible to me that a President has the unilateral power to pardon people with no checks and balances. Maybe we should have the Supreme Court decide on whether or not to allow these pardons. It can be in secret for all I care but at least the people would know that there's at least some kind of oversight on the legitimacy of these pardons...
The oversight is usually that they are run through a strict process through the Department of Justice, or that they are at the very least consulted. Reason being is there is hardly anything that can look worse for a President than a pardon that reeks of corruption or being unfair. Trump didn't even pretend to bother with going through the DOJ process (and with Sessions in charge, they likely would have OKed the damn thing anyway).
People need to keep in mind this was, at MAX, a 6 month sentence (and he may or may not have gotten that or any time at all). The idea that this was so urgent that it had to be done NOW, before a sentence can even be handed out, is insane. This pardon is two things (maybe three): 1.) a play to the white nationalist base after Charlottesville 2.) another direct attack by Trump on the judiciary and (possibly) 3.) laying the groundwork for the very real possibility that he is going to be pardoning MANY more people as time goes on who are directly linked to his campaign. It's sending the message that "if you hold the line for me, if you take the bullet, I'll get you out of it". He's preparing to do a complete end-run around the entire legal system.
"Might kill someone in the future" is hardly something you could judge people over, seeing as that could be applied to literally anyone alive.
Maybe so but I'm just reading the tea leaves here. Antifa doesn't appear to be playing this like Mahatma Ghandi to me.
They aren't, they are explicitly committed to using violence if necessary to stop those they think are fascists. They are an outgrowth of the anarchists we have been seeing since the famous WTO protests in Seattle back in 2000. Same type of people. They burn trash cans, they break windows, they will occasionally hit those on the other side in street confrontations with blunt instruments. They also have apparently stabbed a police horse. I'm against stabbing horses (which reminds me, a great solution to this Confederate monument debate I heard was to take down the generals and leave the horses up, since the horses aren't guilty of anything. I support this method).
In the 17 years or so this anarchist protest behavior has been going on, they have yet to kill anyone that I know of, even pre-dating Antifa. I don't know this for a fact, but the reason seems obvious: they don't seem to carry guns, or at least not very many of them. Because if they did, they would have shot someone by now, just based on the law of averages. Guns aren't the ONLY thing that kills people, but guns make it infinitely EASIER to kill people, both from a technical and mental standpoint.
"Might kill someone in the future" is hardly something you could judge people over, seeing as that could be applied to literally anyone alive.
Maybe so but I'm just reading the tea leaves here. Antifa doesn't appear to be playing this like Mahatma Ghandi to me.
They do seem more MLK Jr...
I think you might be thinking of Malcolm X. MLK's goal was entirely peaceful, and it put him at odds with people like Malcolm X who were saying "enough is enough". King's goal was to get those images of cops using water hoses on children and beating down African-Americans in suits to get on TV outside the South. He was betting that when people saw it, they would be revolted. He then tried to destroy the income of the public transit system with the bus boycott. And to have SO many people march that it overflowed the jails and caused the system to be unworkable. It was about making state-sanctioned racism impossible to maintain from a logistical standpoint.
But don't mistake that for all that happened. While the Civil Rights Movement was eventually victorious, it also took Kennedy and Johnson sending federal troops into the South and federalizing the National Guard to make sure things were implemented.
Normally the way justice works is Johnny Law puts pressure on the lower level guys to flip on the bigger fish. If in the situation of Trump past illegal dealings and Russian treason, there's no leverage there. Why worry when Trump'll just pardon you? Zero pressure. Literally a get out of jail free card. And that's not just for past crimes, feel free to steal and loot be corrupted and Sessions will look away because your one of Trump's boys. Even if you get caught there's a trump card in the White House, pardons for everyone!
@jjstraka34 I wasn't being serious, hence the wink. That said, Charlottesville was very much a showcase of actual murder and death threats from the Right, and how the murder of a protester was (mostly) dealt with was a bit non-violent, certainly not eye for eye anyways. MLK was hig on letting people make themselves look bad.
I will call BS on someone judging groups for things they might do. By that reasoning, I'd be justified in committing massacres of right wingers because clearly they're going to form a violent fascist state that will kill 25% of the world's population. Oh, sure, they haven't done it yet, but I can read the tea leaves.
Thats a bit harsh maybe, come on, judge actual actions please.
For the record, the president does have the constitutional ability to issue pardons for individuals, and to my knowledge, there aren't actually any restrictions or limits on pardons.
A presidential pardon is not necessarily a good thing, and I do think there should be some limits on it, but it is in fact legal.
For the record, the president does have the constitutional ability to issue pardons for individuals, and to my knowledge, there aren't actually any restrictions or limits on pardons.
A presidential pardon is not necessarily a good thing, and I do think there should be some limits on it, but it is in fact legal.
It's not a big issue normally because most Presidents don't blatantly abuse the power. Leave it to Trump to bulldoze over norms and expose a flaw in the Constitution - the founding fathers hoped Presidents would have integrity and act in the interests of the country not in their own selfish corrupt interests.
In 2013, President Barack Obama issued Executive Order 13653 to prepare the United States for the impacts of climate change. The order included directions for the federal government to work with state and local governments to look at infrastructure projects to help prepare for changes brought about by climate change, such as more powerful hurricanes. Trump rescinded this EO in March.
Another Executive Order 13690, signed by President Obama in 2015, required all federal investments involving floodplains to meet higher flood risk management standards, to help ensure that infrastructure in those areas would be more resilient. Trump rescinded this EO a couple weeks ago.
Trump’s proposed budget “seeks to cut 26 percent from NOAA’s Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, which supports data collection, climate and science, as well as research into more accurate weather forecasting models.”
At least before he went on vacation again this weekend he told the residents of Texas "good luck".
For the record, the president does have the constitutional ability to issue pardons for individuals, and to my knowledge, there aren't actually any restrictions or limits on pardons.
A presidential pardon is not necessarily a good thing, and I do think there should be some limits on it, but it is in fact legal.
This goes back to the very, very important subject of societal and political norms. For decades we have been living under a series of unwritten rules that certain actions are beyond the scope of reason. It used to be that sitting Presidents were actually allowed to appoint their Supreme Court picks. It used to be that the person holding the office of the President wasn't personally profiting off the job WHILE IN office. And it used to be that Presidents didn't pardon political allies on a random Friday 8 months into their term with no consultation with the Department of Justice. But all those things have happened or are happening, and it is only going to get worse as this goes on. And he will never quit shattering these norms until someone stops him. Where does it end??
State level charges (either in New York or Florida) laid against him and an impeachment process prior to Mueller finishing his investigation.
Once impeached, Mueller lays his charges against everyone else involved. Pence will escape Scot free on the distinction he will not offer pardons to those who are being charged.
Pence takes over as a highly religious conservative, limiting gay civil rights for a decade (if he gets re-elected) but at least bringing civility back to POTUS.
State level charges (either in New York or Florida) laid against him and an impeachment process prior to Mueller finishing his investigation.
Once impeached, Mueller lays his charges against everyone else involved. Pence will escape Scot free on the distinction he will not offer pardons to those who are being charged.
Pence takes over as a highly religious conservative, limiting gay civil rights for a decade (if he gets re-elected) but at least bringing civility back to POTUS.
(Or is that wishful thinking?)
There is alot of speculation this ends with Eric Schneiderman, the AG of NY, swooping in with state charges after the fact. Trump has no power to grant pardons for if that happens.
A couple of notes about pardons--as @jjstraka34 notes, Presidential pardons only apply for federal crimes, so Trump could not pardon anyone for any charges brought by states. At the very least, it seems likely that New York will be bringing at least some charges.
Another important detail is that a person pardoned forfeits 5th Amendment protections as they can no longer be incriminated, self- or otherwise. As such, they can be forced to offer testimony and a refusal to do so means lots of judicial (or congressional, as appropriate) contempt charges, which are also not subject to pardon.
As a side note, there's no question Mueller, a long-time DC veteran, is aware of all of this and is tailoring his investigation accordingly. I doubt it's the traditional 'flip the little fish to get the big fish' methodology.
A couple of notes about pardons--as @jjstraka34 notes, Presidential pardons only apply for federal crimes, so Trump could not pardon anyone for any charges brought by states. At the very least, it seems likely that New York will be bringing at least some charges.
Another important detail is that a person pardoned forfeits 5th Amendment protections as they can no longer be incriminated, self- or otherwise. As such, they can be forced to offer testimony and a refusal to do so means lots of judicial (or congressional, as appropriate) contempt charges, which are also not subject to pardon.
As a side note, there's no question Mueller, a long-time DC veteran, is aware of all of this and is tailoring his investigation accordingly. I doubt it's the traditional 'flip the little fish to get the big fish' methodology.
Every article I have read sounds like he is putting together the legal version of the '92 Dream Team, including lawyers specializing in both money laundering and flipping witnesses. The best way to view what is happening with Mueller and Russia by all indications is the way you would look at a RICO trial of the mob.
Now it is being reported that Trump asked Sessions long before Arapio's actual conviction if he would drop the case altogether. That is another matter entirely from the eventual pardon.
Also, more "both sides" in Charlottesville. And further evidence at the insanely long rope granted to you if you are white and marching for a conservative cause:
Now it is being reported that Trump asked Sessions long before Arapio's actual conviction if he would drop the case altogether. That is another matter entirely from the eventual pardon.
Also, more "both sides" in Charlottesville. And further evidence at the insanely long rope granted to you if you are white and marching for a conservative cause:
I think this is one of times when you do not want to escalate the situation. The majority of the white nationalist were walking away peacefully. If the police moved in things could have went south very quickly as who knows who else was armed in that line and the white nationalists had already threatened use of force towards police as shown in the Vice piece.
The sightline from the police to where the idiot actually fired the gun was also blocked by the protesters walking away and the tree by the staircase down. One shot can be mistaken for a fire cracker or other small explosive device, so chances are they heard it, but didn't know what it was. No one else acted in a panic, no one ran away screaming so the police had nothing to act on if they didn't have a clear sight on the guy firing the gun.
Perhaps if this video was actually shown to one of the officers on duty at the scene instead of horded for retweets something substantial might have happened then, however, the article states that they do have a person in custody from the shooting so it hasn't been ignored.
Antifa never hurt anyone. lol Most people in this forum have probably only heard of them because of Trump. The world has been fighting this disease for at least 2 decades now.
yeah no one has heard of them because they are like nothing. We've all heard of right wing neo-nazis and racists because they've homegrown terrorists that killed lots of people including Heather D. Heyer in Charlottesville, VA. They also killed plenty of black men throughout the ages by lynchings and what have you.
The fact that the Trump administration and Sessions justice department seem to condone this sort of thing made people think that they have to stand up to these facists. If they were held accountable and not excused because Trump thinks they're going to vote for him then there would be no need for antifa.
Comments
He's always acted as though he is above the law and that the law applies to everyone else (but especially brown people). It seems Trump proved him right he is above the law.
Next he'll probably be offered a job in the Trump Administration in charge of Homeland Security or something.
Bernie Sanders lobbied for this, by the way.
Credits to Politico, at least, who to my knowledge are the only left leaning source to call it like it is and not report on it neutrally to favorably, all important facts left out.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/oscar-lopez-commutation-barack-obama-214685
And you are saying that is worse than pardoning a person who campaigned and financed for the current sitting president before his sentence, which could have amounted to little more than a fine and a person who has not shown any remorse for his actions and claims his case was politically motivated?
Which of the two above reeks of corruption more? That is the one you should be appalled at the most, if not, the corruption will just get worse.
Or are you saying two wrongs can make a right and it's no big deal because person X in history did MUCH worse. That isn't much of an argument either.
In ten pages of a Google search of "has Anitfa killed anyone??" there isn't a single story (not even a fake one, oddly enough) that provides evidence of this occurring.
People need to keep in mind this was, at MAX, a 6 month sentence (and he may or may not have gotten that or any time at all). The idea that this was so urgent that it had to be done NOW, before a sentence can even be handed out, is insane. This pardon is two things (maybe three): 1.) a play to the white nationalist base after Charlottesville 2.) another direct attack by Trump on the judiciary and (possibly) 3.) laying the groundwork for the very real possibility that he is going to be pardoning MANY more people as time goes on who are directly linked to his campaign. It's sending the message that "if you hold the line for me, if you take the bullet, I'll get you out of it". He's preparing to do a complete end-run around the entire legal system.
In the 17 years or so this anarchist protest behavior has been going on, they have yet to kill anyone that I know of, even pre-dating Antifa. I don't know this for a fact, but the reason seems obvious: they don't seem to carry guns, or at least not very many of them. Because if they did, they would have shot someone by now, just based on the law of averages. Guns aren't the ONLY thing that kills people, but guns make it infinitely EASIER to kill people, both from a technical and mental standpoint.
But don't mistake that for all that happened. While the Civil Rights Movement was eventually victorious, it also took Kennedy and Johnson sending federal troops into the South and federalizing the National Guard to make sure things were implemented.
I will call BS on someone judging groups for things they might do. By that reasoning, I'd be justified in committing massacres of right wingers because clearly they're going to form a violent fascist state that will kill 25% of the world's population. Oh, sure, they haven't done it yet, but I can read the tea leaves.
Thats a bit harsh maybe, come on, judge actual actions please.
A presidential pardon is not necessarily a good thing, and I do think there should be some limits on it, but it is in fact legal.
Another Executive Order 13690, signed by President Obama in 2015, required all federal investments involving floodplains to meet higher flood risk management standards, to help ensure that infrastructure in those areas would be more resilient. Trump rescinded this EO a couple weeks ago.
Trump’s proposed budget “seeks to cut 26 percent from NOAA’s Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, which supports data collection, climate and science, as well as research into more accurate weather forecasting models.”
At least before he went on vacation again this weekend he told the residents of Texas "good luck".
Once impeached, Mueller lays his charges against everyone else involved. Pence will escape Scot free on the distinction he will not offer pardons to those who are being charged.
Pence takes over as a highly religious conservative, limiting gay civil rights for a decade (if he gets re-elected) but at least bringing civility back to POTUS.
(Or is that wishful thinking?)
Once impeached, Mueller lays his charges against everyone else involved. Pence will escape Scot free on the distinction he will not offer pardons to those who are being charged.
Pence takes over as a highly religious conservative, limiting gay civil rights for a decade (if he gets re-elected) but at least bringing civility back to POTUS.
(Or is that wishful thinking?)
There is alot of speculation this ends with Eric Schneiderman, the AG of NY, swooping in with state charges after the fact. Trump has no power to grant pardons for if that happens.
Another important detail is that a person pardoned forfeits 5th Amendment protections as they can no longer be incriminated, self- or otherwise. As such, they can be forced to offer testimony and a refusal to do so means lots of judicial (or congressional, as appropriate) contempt charges, which are also not subject to pardon.
As a side note, there's no question Mueller, a long-time DC veteran, is aware of all of this and is tailoring his investigation accordingly. I doubt it's the traditional 'flip the little fish to get the big fish' methodology.
Also, more "both sides" in Charlottesville. And further evidence at the insanely long rope granted to you if you are white and marching for a conservative cause:
The sightline from the police to where the idiot actually fired the gun was also blocked by the protesters walking away and the tree by the staircase down. One shot can be mistaken for a fire cracker or other small explosive device, so chances are they heard it, but didn't know what it was. No one else acted in a panic, no one ran away screaming so the police had nothing to act on if they didn't have a clear sight on the guy firing the gun.
Perhaps if this video was actually shown to one of the officers on duty at the scene instead of horded for retweets something substantial might have happened then, however, the article states that they do have a person in custody from the shooting so it hasn't been ignored.
Antifa never hurt anyone. lol Most people in this forum have probably only heard of them because of Trump. The world has been fighting this disease for at least 2 decades now.
They are mercenaries for hire, plain and simple.
"The wheels on the bus go round and round..."
The fact that the Trump administration and Sessions justice department seem to condone this sort of thing made people think that they have to stand up to these facists. If they were held accountable and not excused because Trump thinks they're going to vote for him then there would be no need for antifa.