Below is my column in the New York Post on the referral of Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner for possible criminal prosecution by a federal judge. Judge Paul Diamond is only the latest jurist to reach the breaking point with Krasner, who has used a mix of rage and race politics to stay in office.
Here is the column:
Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner has long been to the law what Philly fans are to football: they are simply willing to do things that others will not do. While Philly fans are known for taking their demonstrations to shocking levels, Krasner has long denounced adversaries as Nazis and pledged to arrest federal immigration officials.
However, a federal judge has finally had enough of the anger and antics that have long been the special brand of Philadelphia’s top prosecutor.
For full disclosure, Krasner and I went to college together at the University of Chicago in the same class in the 1980s. Since then, we have debated and disagreed on fundamental legal and ethical principles.
Krasner has long worked as a second public defender for the city, running on his work to reduce the prosecution and incarceration of accused felons. He has portrayed the criminal justice system as racist and oppressive. At the same time, he has held chest-pounding press conferences pledging to arrest FBI agents and to “hunt down” ICE officers.
His theatrics have delighted his political base and the far left. The George Soros-funded prosecutor actually adopted a campaign slogan of “F— around and find out” in 2025. He was not referring to the criminals victimizing the city, but to federal officers seeking to enforce the law.
Even liberal Democratic judges have had enough.
Last June, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court hit Krasner with a scathing opinion finding a pattern of misleading and mendacious filings by his office to undermine the criminal cases of murderers and other convicts.
The rebuke prompted a signature response from Krasner. Citing the Juneteenth anniversary, Krasner accused the Court of attacking “the value of a vote in Philadelphia” and defending his staff as merely furthering the work of racial justice.
Now, District Judge Paul Diamond, a George W. Bush appointee, has reached his own limit with Krasner. He has referred the District Attorney for investigation after taking the rare step of removing him and Assistant District Attorney Matthew Stiegler from involvement in a 2009 murder case.
Diamond wrote he had come to this decision “reluctantly” but had “concluded that Philadelphia’s highest law enforcement official and one of his top assistants may have violated the law.”
He was referring to testimony alleging a pressure campaign against employees who raised concerns within the DA’s office over the handling of the case and the conduct of Stiegler.
Staffers were allegedly told that they could face “consequences” if they did not fall in line, and Diamond found that Krasner and Stiegler’s conduct may have amounted to perjury, obstruction of justice, false statements under oath, and conspiracy.
The underlying case involved the conviction of Dennis Johnson in 2009 for killing Kenyatta Smith.
In 2022, Krasner’s office filed to seek to help Johnson in a habeas action based on ineffective assistance of counsel.
Krasner and his assistant Stiegler assigned then-Assistant District Attorney Jaclyn Mason to the case. Diamond noted that Mason had a background in patent and trademark law and “no experience as a criminal litigator.”
What followed was a series of alleged misrepresentations to spring Johnson from prison, a pattern long associated with Krasner’s office. As Krasner and Stiegler circled the wagons in the office, there was a virtual mutiny among prosecutors who felt that the office had a conflict of interest and should not continue to handle the case.
Krasner is accused of coercing prosecutors and allegedly encouraging false and obstructive conduct. Mason was trashed, but she insisted that she was scapegoated to protect Krasner and Stiegler.
In another signature moment, Diamond accuses Krasner of referring to state lawyers in the case as “Nazis,” his favorite label for any political adversaries.
The ultimate losers, however, are the victims like Kenyatta Smith and the others cast aside by Krasner in his use of his office to fuel racial politics and a radical agenda.
As I have written in prior controversies, Krasner appears to have exhausted the patience of courts and the loyalty of staff. He is accused of being a prosecutor who not only worked to undermine criminal cases but the justice system itself. For a man who ran on the slogan “F around and find out,” Larry Krasner may soon find out.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
Professor Turley is back with another masterclass in selective legal outrage, treating a local procedural dispute like an existential crisis.
Turley hyperventilates over Krasner’s campaign slogan, claiming it was directed at federal officers trying to enforce the law. In reality, the slogan was used in the context of political resistance against political overreach and unconstitutional interventions—not a literal call to hunt down rank-and-file agents. But Turley loves a good boogeyman, so he bends the timeline to make a campaign posture look like a criminal conspiracy.
Turley treats Judge Diamond’s referral of Krasner as an unprecedented, career-ending catastrophe. If judicial referrals and reprimands are the standard for being unfit for office, Turley should have run out of ink years ago covering Trump’s legal circle. From Jeffrey Clark’s near-indictment for trying to use the DOJ to overturn an election, to the dozens of Trump-appointed lawyers who have been sanctioned, referred for disbarment, or literally indicted for abusing the legal system, Krasner’s internal office drama looks like a minor HR dispute by comparison. Oy Vey!
Turley acts as though a prosecutor aggressively challenging old convictions is an attack on “the justice system itself.” He frames a technical, messy habeas corpus dispute as a malicious plot to “spring murderers.” In reality, correcting past prosecutorial misconduct and dealing with ineffective counsel is exactly what a progressive DA was elected to do. Turley simply cannot stomach a prosecutor who views the system’s past failures as something to fix rather than something to cover up.
No wonder this posted so late. He was busy scrapping the bottom of the barrel.
It must be exhausting for Turley to constantly navigate the legal landscape with such severe tunnel vision—meticulously documenting the speck in a progressive DA’s eye while completely ignoring the absolute logging operation taking place in the Republican party’s legal apparatus.
X,
If you really and truly believe that the allegations against Krasner are more like “a local procedural dispute” than “an existential crisis”, then you might find a refresher year or two in law school (assuming you went to law school) to be helpful.
Did you even review the case? You haven’t made an argument for why it is NOT a procedural dispute. A better question would be do you have a better argument than what Turley alleges?
Argument? What is there to argue, you have no facts. You just make shite up X.
What was made up? Please show us.
Us? Dissociative identity disorder? For X, it’s called multiple personality disorder.
Made up? Let’s see … all of it. Am I right or what eh?
You made up the claim this is a procedural dispute – Krasner is accused by a federal judge of lying under oath.
That is not procedural.
You made numerous other errors – While Turley raised Krasners political rhetoric which is protected free speech so long as Kranser does not ACT on it, and obstruction of justice if he does. Turley pointed that out as evidence of Krasners lack of ethics.
It is clearly unethical for a lawyer to promise to do something he knows is a crime in order to get elected.
Kransers criminal referal is NOT about that. It is NOT about obstructing Federal Officers.
It is about lying under oath.
George can’t discern fact from fiction. And he wonders why no wants to argue with him. But what is there to argue?
He think his opinion is a fact. Now that’s called delusion.
Mary can’t do her duty to America—have babies, lots and lots of babies, up to and including 25 or 30.
“Did you even review the case? ”
Did you read the post ?
Perjury is NOT procedural EVER.
being accused of perjury is a CRIMINAL matter.
I am not aware of a prosecutor anywhere ever being accused of perjury by a federal judge.
This is not a procedural dispute – because the judge has made a referal to DOJ for a criminal prosecution.
Separately, Habeaus claims are not procedural in the small sense.
A Habeaus claim requires that the plaintiff (Habeaus is technically a civil case, and the plantiff is the criminal defendant, and the burden of proof is on them). PROVES a violation of their constitutional rights. While that can be a due process failure, it MUST be a MAJOR due process failure – such as hiding exclupatory evidence. You will not win a habeaus claim over “technical and messy procedural claims”
You need a constitutional rights violation that “shocks the conscience”
As usual you are WRONG on multiple levels.
Perjory is not a technical and messy procedural error.
And Habeaus cases are about serious violations of constitutional rights – not “techical and messy procedural claims”
Gideon was a Habeaus claim.
Estovir is Stephen Benisch, Esq.
X has no legal background. Stated it hundreds of times.
But one thing does have is a hard-on for everything Turley.
And up to now no one engages him; his comments are just too delusional. Disprove that X.
Never claimed to have any. That doesn’t mean I can’t comment on a case or be critical of Turley’s claims.
Clearly you’re suffering from George Derangement Syndrome.
Never claimed? Correct, the first fact you ever stated.
Dearngemnent syndrome? Sure X, whatever you say.
Turley is famous, an author, a real lawyer, a professor etc. and you? Just cellar based troll.
You are free to comment on anything you want.
You are even free to lie or just be plain stupid.
The freedom to lie or be stupid merely means you can not be prosecuted for that
It does NOT mean you can not be chastised or insulted.
As usually – you are not only wrong – but you are OBVIOUSLY wrong.
Your errors are so obvious that you are either lying or incredibly stupid.
George X is back with another masterclass in selective Turley rage.
A better question for X:
Why do you jump and are you so eager to tear apart or try to discredit whatever Turley posts. Your tepid excuse that he is “fair game” runs really thin-to the point of transparent. Did you flunk the bar? Were you denied entrance to law school? Were you fired? Most or all of the lawyers here have corrected you on multiple posts, but you come back swinging and telling them that they need reading comprehension skills. Pretty funny coming from you. Really immature.
Something is wrong here. Doesn’t matter that you “can” because this is an open blog. What matters is that you “DO.” Every day, multiple times. You really do have problems. Admit it.
Why not? It’s a forum to discuss, criticize, debate, and post your views. Turley IS fair game. It’s literally the a critical concept of exercising free speech.
It matters that I CAN because it’s an open blog. Just like you CAN follow me and criticize my posts every day. I don’t care if you do. It seems you are more worried about what I say regarding Turley or anyone else. Which is very strange.
What do I “DO” every day? It’s no different than what everyone else does here. You’re clearly a very confused individual.
No, X, you are a low-intelligence POS who fakes relevance. Don’t know the technical term, but it’s when you try to make yourself look better or smarter by trying to make everyone else look lower than you. It’s a recognized psycho diagnosis and tactic.
You are here every day with a chip on your shoulder and a grudge to carry.
WE are here to discuss substance.
It’s working folks, X is lashing out. Are you gonna cry now George?
The story of X and JT has yet to be told but I know.
X,
Yes, you can exercise free speech. What a tragedy that the revolutionaries didn’t think that Charlie Kirk could too!
Amen
X absolutely you are free to lie and say obviously stupid things.
And others are free to point out that you are either lying or incredibly stupid.
Your right to speak freely does NOT include a right to be listened to equally.
While govenrment can not restrict a persons oportunity to speak merely because they are stupid or a liar.
Private actors can.
And private listeners can reject or ignore you – simply because you have burned your credibility to ash.
John Say,
Well said and spot on. Just scroll past GSX/Gigi/Esquire/etc. Not worth reading.
To answer your first question, “he” is eager to tear apart Turley’s posts because they are paid to do so. Do you really believe that our resident trolls are posting here everyday, often multiple times, free of charge? There are staffers and interns galore that have been assigned to post on political blogs. Sadly, this is their entire life.
I would be unsurprised to learn that Turley is given notes and an outline from Federalist Society management for his topics.
While I doubt it
The federalist society would be a good source on constitutional issues.
Perjury is not a procedural dispute – it is a crime.
It is extremely serious when a judge accuses a DA of perjury
No Krasner’s perjury was not directed at Federal officers trying to enforce the law.
Kransner’s protected speech was directd at federal officers enforcing the law.
Krasner acting on that speech would be illegal – obstruction of justice.
But to my knowledge while MANY left wing politicians have PROMISED to violate the law and obstruct federal officers.
Very very few have gone from rhetoric to action.
Regardless there is nothing even slightly illegal about democrat political candidates lying to voters.
“Turley treats Judge Diamond’s referral of Krasner as an unprecedented, career-ending catastrophe.”
Judges RARELY refer District attorneys – or even assistant district attorneys for prosecution.
They also RARELY reprimand them. Prosecutors are nearly immune from ethics or criminal inquiries into their courtroom conduct.
While you exagerate the number of DOJ attorneys that courts have threatened to sanction – I am not aware of a single instance in which they have actually done so. Judge Boasberg threatened to do so repeatedly – even after the supreme court told him he never had jurisdiction.
The REAL question is why aren’t the judges who are thmselves the ones engaged in lawless and unethical conduct being sanctioned.
Absoutely DEMOCRATS have engaged in lawfare against myriads of Trump attorneys – these were NOT federal prosecutors, but private attorney’s – and DEMOCRATS have ultimately LOST most of those efforts.
Please identify any DOJ attorney that has ACTUALLY been sanctioned by the court ?
Please identify any Private attorney working for Trump who has not ultimately prevailed against left wing nut lawfare ?
John Eastman has spent Millions defending himself against your lawfare – SUCCESSFULLY.
No this is not “internal drame” – Without any doubt SOMEONE in the Philadelphia DA’s office lied under oath to this judge.
How do we know ? Because different lawyers from the Philadelphia DA’s office have told the court stories that contradict each other.
The Judge has concluded that Krasner and his assistant are the ones who Lied under oath, not the rest of the Philadelphia DA’s office.
“Turley acts as though a prosecutor aggressively challenging old convictions is an attack on “the justice system itself.””
First – Prosecutors almost NEVER challenge old convictions – they defend them tooth and nail against even in the rare instances that appears idiotic. It is extremely rare for a proscutor to not agressively defend a conviction.
Absolutely I think that on occasion prosecutors defend cases they should not.
Absolutely there are real instances were there are clear injustices.
But those are NOT the norm.
Further the REQUIRED standard of conduct for a prosecutor regarding an existing conviction is to defend that conviction absent proof beyond a reasonable doubt the conviction was unjust.
It is NOT the job of a prosecutor today to second guess the decisions of prosecutors in the past.
Absent actual proof beyond a reasonabe doubt of injustice – prosecutors MUST ethically defend successful prosecutions.
Prosecutors do NOT have pardon or clemency power.
They are one half of our adversarial system.
It is their job to prosecute crime and to defend convictions – it is the defense attorney’s job to defend the accused.
Prior to conviction the burden of proof is on the prosecutor.
After it is on the defense attorney.
As I noted before – My wife is the head of appeals for the public defenders office in a county in Pennsylvania.
It is the role of the courts – or a jury at a trial, and of the judges during appeals to weigh the merits of the arguments of the prosecutors and the defense attorneys.
A growing number of courts in PA – including the PA supreme court have found that Krasner is acting unethically.
The PA supreme court is nearly entirely democrat.
” He frames a technical, messy habeas corpus dispute as a malicious plot to “spring murderers.” ”
Kranser’s problems do not stem from a single case – but a very large number of cases.
Habeaus corpus cases are not messy – they are the very last ditch efforts of defense attorney’s and they lose 99.999% of the time.
To win a Habeus claim the defense must prove either actual innocence or an incredibly large violation of due process.
Prior to getting to a Habeus hearing a defendent has already had ATLEAST two major series of appeals.
First they get direct appeals where ALMOST everything is on the table – defendants are generally barred from raising “innefective assistance of counsel” claims on direct appeal – those must wait to the 2nd major series of appeals – PCRA’s. It is not until after both the direct appeal and PCRA have gone from the trial court, to the superior court to the PA supreme court that a defendant can raise a Habeus claim.
Further if there is a Constitutional issue with the initial trial – that con be appealed both in state and federal courts.
Again before Haebus is raised.
New Evidence claims – usually start a NEW series of state appeals.
Before a convicted criminal gets to a Habeaus claim – they have to have exhausted all other appeals.
That means that probably atleast a dozen different judges have already reviewed the case and ruled against the defendant.
Habeuas cases do not ALWAYS lose – just 99.999% of the time.
And they rarely are messy or technical – all the messy and technical aspects of a conviction were addressed by the courts LONG before habeaus is raised.
“In reality, correcting past prosecutorial misconduct ”
Is dealt with on direct appeal.
“dealing with ineffective counsel”
Is adressed in a PCRA appeal – not a federal Habeuas claim.
” is exactly what a progressive DA was elected to do.”
Maybe – but it is NOT a legitimate role of a District attorney.
Krasner arguably was also elected to go after ICE and FBI agents – but he has not done that – because he can not do so legally – in most instances trying would actually be a crime In the few it would not, State and local prosecutors do not have jurisdiction over federal government agents acting as part of their job.
” Turley simply cannot stomach a prosecutor who views the system’s past failures as something to fix rather than something to cover up.”
That is not their job. It is also an incorrect framing of What Krasner is doing.
In the real world there are lots of things that prosecutors do that I disagree with – and they get away with it.
AS noted it is extremely rare for a PROSECUTOR to face successful ethics charges, and virtually never criminal allegations arrising from their conduct as prosecutors.
In the real world nearly all of what prosecutors do that I disagree with does not change the outcome of a case at all.
Regardless of the constitutionally required presumption of innocence – most ordinary criminal defendants are guilty – usually of alot more than they are accused of.
In 20 years as a public defender My wife has won maybe a dozen cases – in most of those the defendant was guilty, but they were over charged or improperly sentenced – and almost always the error is on the part of the judge – not the prosecutor.
AGAIN while there are legal and ethical constraints on prosecutors, actual misconduct by a prosecutor must be pretty egregious – such as failing to provide exculpatory evidence, to find an error on the part of the prosecutor.
Prosecutors (and defense attorney’s) are part of an ADVERSARIAL process. It is the judge and jury that are expected to be fair and just.
I noted my wife won maybe a dozen cases in 20 years. Out of hundreds of cases she has had TWO people who were ultimately found Actually Innocent. I do not beleive there is a single instance of a successful habeaus case from our county in 20 years.
I do not recall a single instance of a successful habeaus case in Pennsylvania over the same time period.
Even out in Indiana we have heard of Mr. Krasner. Also a fairly strongly worded column today by the Professor. Knowing the Professor’s strong sports allegiance to Chicago and then his dig at Philadelphia sports fans, I suspected this would be a fiery column (for the Professor) and I feel I was right.
Mr Krazner seems to have totally forgotten who he is supposed to be representing in court. I thought he represented the people and their desire for justice. This can, of course, also include those who were charged with criminal acts. But Mr Krazner seems to have taken on the role of Public Defender and left the law abiding citizens to their own devices in order to get justice for themselves and their families.
I applaud the judge for the referral to the Dept of Justice where I am sure the prospect of pursuing Mr Krazner will be greeted with real glee. I suppose we will all be awaiting the “Find Out” part with “bated breath”.
Mr Krazner seems to have totally forgotten who he is supposed to be representing in court.
No he did not, he represents himself.
There are far too many Justices, Judges, District Attorneys, and Attorney’s that have become activists that are openly willing to set aside actual justice in favor of social justice. All these “professionals” have made a mockery of the profession giving the impression that real justice is dead.
REAL JUSTICE IS NOT DEAD!
The loud mouthed social justice warriors within the justice system are a minority. All the majority has to do is collectively stand up for real justice and put the minority activist people trying to b-a-s-t-a-r-d-i-z-e the justice system out of a job, let them flip burgers or sweep floors.
Steve Witherspoon, Your emotional outburst demands that professionals be fired or “flip burgers” for trying to evolve how the law serves marginalized communities. Meanwhile, the actual, documented subversion of the law—the kind that gets a prosecutor disqualified by a federal court for executing unlawful subpoenas—is being carried out by partisan actors attempting to turn the DOJ into an executive enforcement wing.
“Real justice” is preserved when officers of the court respect the rule of law, the separation of powers, and basic constitutional boundaries. Demanding that the justice system act as a weapon to mass-fire anyone whose political philosophy you dislike isn’t defending justice—it’s just classic authoritarian fantasy.
Federal judges across the country are openly slamming Trump DOJ lawyers for unprecedented, unethical behavior. Judges have caught Trump federal prosecutors redacting grand jury transcripts to hide misconduct, attempting to weaponize criminal investigations to harass political opponents, and displaying an “appalling disregard for the duty of candor”.
You’re barking up the wrong tree fella.
ATS so far the unlawful subpeonas that have made the news are those involving the lawfare on the left by the likes of Jack Smith on cahoots with Judge Boasberg.
It all started long ago with Lincoln. Secession was ingrained in the Founders and Framers and part and parcel of the American Revolution. Secession was never prohibited, illicit, or unconstitutional. The Civil War must never have happened. In a democracy, reprehensible slavery must have been formally abrogated by legislation. The Constitution and actual justice have been set aside for 166 years. Social Security, Medicare, etc., may not have been taxed for as “general Welfare.” They serve merely 18.7% of the population. Elected Officials, Administrators, Justices, Judges, District Attorneys, and Attorneys have become activists that are openly willing to set aside the Constitution and actual justice in favor of social justice and the Communist Manifesto.
Lincolns fault? Daily LDS crap from ANON! Get a life other than CRAZY ABE obsession!!
Such a profound and irrefutable rebuttal from a brilliant rhetorician.
Hear, hear!
Estovir is Steve Witherspoon.
It’s very confusing. Krasner didn’t want Johnson convicted because of race? Are there other motives? Sounds like Krasner is a baddie.
Can you imagine if this guy really faces justice and finds himself escorted by the law enforcement officers he’s been threatening? What has happened to Alvin Bragg, he sure went silent?
The whole of the New York communist government is abjectly corrupt, criminal, anti-American, and unconstitutional. At some point, that will be discovered.
The Democrats are now fully nihilist. That is, they reject with prejudice any facts which clash with their ideology and all human values, honesty, competence integrity, excellence, beauty, and particularly justice which they falsely label ‘racist’. Krasner is a typical example of leftist ideology in action; that is, he sacrifices the honest, the decent, the hard working to the vicious, the crooked, the outright murdering scum o behalf of his winning the next election. If the people of Philadelphia want to keep him, they’ll get what they deserve.
Very well said.
I’m pretty familiar with the case. Although the facts are not fully developed—we may need a federal grand jury for that—what seems to have happened is that convicted murderer, Dennis Johnson, after filing numerous unsuccessful appeals, filed a habeas petition in federal court.
Normally, experienced appellate attorneys in the DAs office would look into the claims, examine the entire case history, evidence, trial transcripts, and then prepare a response. A supervisor would then read the response, question the ADA, and then make a determination of whether to fight the appeal, or in rare cases, agree to recommend that the defendant be given relief by the judge.
Here, a completely inexperienced new attorney, ADA Mason, was assigned this case by supervisor Stiegler. According to her testimony as I understood it, the written response came to her basically completed, and the federal defense attorneys and attorneys from the Innocence Project were heavily involved in drafting it. It was assigned to her as a case where Stiegler had already decided that the DA was going to concede relief, it was just a question of what grounds they would base that on. When it was drafted to Stiegler’s satisfaction, she was instructed to sign and submit it to the federal court.
The problems began when it was discovered that the statement of the facts contained serious mistakes or falsehoods if you will. Among other mistakes, it was alleged that Johnson should get a new trial because the eyewitnesses to the shooting didnt know Johnson and didnt get a good look at him. But the trial notes show that they had known Johnson for years and got a ve good look at him.
Since then, it’s turned into a hot mess of coverups, conflicts of interest, and blame-shifting by Krasner and some underlings.
@Rigeldog,
You frame the involvement of the federal public defenders and the Innocence Project as some sort of backroom collusion. In reality, joint filings and collaborated concessions are standard practice in Conviction Integrity Units (CIUs) nationwide. When a prosecutor’s office reviews a 15-year-old file and finds glaring issues—such as the defendant’s trial attorney literally confessing to his own incompetence in writing—cooperating with the defense to rectify a broken conviction is the correct, ethical move, not a conspiracy.
The discrepancies in the concession brief regarding what the eyewitnesses saw were admitted as serious errors. However, framing it as an intentional, malicious lie to “spring a murderer” ignores the fact that the underlying case did feature significant witness issues, including an eyewitness who actively recanted their identification. There is a massive difference between sloppy, overworked administrative review of decades-old trial notes and a criminal cover-up.
You claim Krasner and Stiegler simply tried to blame a junior attorney. While Judge Diamond focused heavily on internal office friction, the reality inside large, understaffed urban DA offices is that structural communication breakdowns happen constantly. Krasner has vigorously and publicly disputed the judge’s findings of fact, noting that a technical procedural dispute over an internal personnel assignment is being blown entirely out of proportion for political theater.
it’s against my religion to read AI curated by a tired old ghey troll
If you, George (X, Sally, Wally, Svelaz) are an Esquire, then I am a high-class paid hooker, unlike Natasha who was a low-class paid hooker.
Esquire – CIU’s are not the norm. Your claim this is standard practice is nonsense.
It is extremely rare for Prosecutors to concede an inch on appeals – even when they are blatantly wrong.
While it does happen, it is very rare – it is not the norm.
Further this is not the only case Krasner is in trouble over or has been taken to taken by the courts.
The PA Supreme court – which leans pretty far left has sanctioned him and some of his staff.
Other courts have removed cases from Krasner and turned them over to the PA AG because Krasner was unethically throwing out solid convictions.
The most extreme estimate is that 2% of those in prison in the US are actually innocent.
Absolutely those people deserve their freedom. But those cases are rare.
Many of us KNOW about those cases because they are so rare they make national news.
They result in Supreme court decisions like Gideon or Miranda, or Carpenter or ..
But the fact that we all KNOW of people who were convicted and proven innocent does not make that common.
There are 2M people in prison in the US. Nearly all of them are guilty as charged.
Those like the Innocence project or Equal Justice foundation that are working hard to get freedom for the actually innocent are laudable.
Their job is hard – too hard.
But it is not made easier by Prosecutors that have no interest in actual innocence and are just engaged in politics.
The #metoo movement was a big deal.
It brought conditions for many women out in the open.
But it also brought out alot of oportunists and liars.
Today MOST of the high profile people called out by the #metoo movement are back at the jobs the had before.
What is Krasner’s motive? The hidden motive isn’t apparent.
Election. He must pander to the base (what an insult!).
OT
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing.”
– [The Right Honourable Edmund Burke?]
_______________________________________________
The Powers around the Middle East—Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, Iraq, and Israel—will have to do something soon to eradicate all regional terrorists, including their state sponsors, and resume the free flow of oil.
The Law is a joke. Judges are political tools. Justice is as dead as the Founders and both are spinning in their graves.
WordPress Censorship Here:
The singular American failure is the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court.
Start with Article 1, Section 8, where no legal basis for the communist American welfare state exists and where the “Commerce” and “Necessary and Proper” clauses have been falsely and corruptly abused to death by anti-American communist judges and justices. And where the absolute 5th Amendment right to private property has been abolished by the disciples of Karl —-ing Marx!
This bull—has got to be stopped. Social Security and Medicare are the biggest illicit, illegal, and unconstitutional drivers of $40 trillion in ridiculous and irrational debt. And so on.
The Constitution severely limits and restricts government while it provides maximal freedom to self-reliant individuals.
Come on Man! CRAZY KRAS is the leader of the Knights Templar of STUPID!! He is a perfect fit for Philthadephia. That city is a Sewer of Human Being Rejects and is a swirling dung pile for Libs and Communists (oops, I mean Socialists because they are sooooo different). You can smell Philly an hour out even if the wind is blowing the other way! Bah haha.
Want to know what I think of Krassner? Tug my finger!
PUPPET SHOW!
Estovir,s puppets were lined up and ready post. Tim Hargdin, Anti Fascist, Stitchfromhawaii, Steve Witherspoon lead the parade.
Brianb1813 and Upstate Farmer are also Estovir.
And ANON IS A PSYCHO MORON!!
Estovir, why do you always use Kirk to call Anon a “psycho moron”? Is that Kirk’s primary designation?
BAN FOR LIFE!
Anonymous wrote, “PUPPET SHOW! Estovir,s puppets were lined up and ready post. Tim Hargdin, Anti Fascist, Stitchfromhawaii, Steve Witherspoon lead the parade.”
I WANT EVERYONE TO FULLY UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT THIS KIND OF COMMENT IS.
Anonymous’ comment is pure ad hominem trolling presented to deflect. There’s absolutely nothing of consequence in comments like this, the troll is simply making up one lie after another about those he/she/it can’t control in a transparent effort to anger others and entertain themself. The purpose of this kind of trolling is to deflect away from the inconvenient content of Turley’s essay.
TROLLING: verb Posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion with constant off-topic deflections. Trolls do this for their own amusement.
Internet trolls are morally bankrupt morons who are psychologically obsessed.
Now back to our regularly scheduled discussion about the actual essay.
ESTOVIR, YOU ARE WITHERSPOON!!
How did the electorate ever vote for this scum Krasner?
“Democracy” was created as the severely restricted-vote version by the Greeks in 508 B.C.
AI Overview
Democracy was created in the ancient Greek city-state of Athens in 508 BCE.
Limitations
Exclusion: Voting rights applied only to successful, free, adult male citizens.
Women, enslaved people, and foreign residents (metics) were completely excluded from the political process.
Athens, where men were men and men had sex with boys.
Seems Federal judges are getting tired of leftist activists antics.
Seems? Its just ONE instance. Can’t extrapolate one data point.
You didn’t read the article DF ANON??
BAN FOR LIFE!
do some research before you post!
The Philadelphia machine – Tammany South – will simply replace him with someone just as bad and maybe worse. No one wins or even runs without permission from the machine. Good luck Philly.
Larry White Krasner accepting money from a literal Nazi collaborator while calling his opponents “Nazis” is quite funny. Maybe Larry White Krasner should step down and let a person of color take his place as Philadelphia’s overseer.
ICYMI, this is Larry’s FAFO clip 🙀🙀🙀
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DI116MZSWcl/?stkn=MWo3czNzcG8xZXN3
Manifestly regarding Krasner, Shakespeare was right on counseling the fate of lawyers. Short of that, one is reminded of the Q&A anecdote: Q: what is the difference between Krasner and a catfish? A: one is a slippery, slimy bottom-feeder and the other is a fish.
Lol⬆️…😂😂😂😂
That joke never gets old 🙀
Where oh where is the State bar Association?
Under Krasner’s thumb.
The State Bar????…. Hahaha .. you made a funny…. 😂😂😂
State Bar organizations are all politics. A political organization.
Trump is going to be in office another 28 months. Deal with it like the man/woman/tranny you are.
Either that, or go to your medical provider, they now have a cure for TDS 🤯🤯🤯
Jump in you MAGAots.
The post has only been up for three minutes and you’re already trolling?
What a f’ing moron.
And what are you doing stupid?
Anonymous wrote, “And what are you doing…”
I was actually reading the essay and your trolling comment interrupted me when it popped up.
It was rhetorical you DF. Popped up? That pissed you off? Oh you poor thing. Steve yo are a fing moron.
BAN FOR LIFE!
Oooo so edgy. your mascara is smeared.
One thing I’d like to point our Steve, you are a fing moron.
Steve,
Right?
Just goes to prove, the annony is here, all day, everyday making dumb comments
Obviously you are a stupid DF.
Why don’t you jump in, leftist puke.
Poor wally … losing it again… idiot geratric.
Shoot yourself in the head. Please!