No problem with Biden or Clinton or Clinton or Holder or Clapper or Brennan breaking the law. No advocacy that charges be brought.
Easy to say you would be “happy to apply” the rule of law to them, knowing that the charges won’t be brought.
That’s all part of the weaponization used by one side.
So the rules apply to one side and not the other.
People see it. They know it’s unfair. They see clearly Holder and Bannon. You can pretend it’s “rule of law”, but it’s obviously not.
You can’t explain that, so you chicken out and say “but I’d be happy to apply it to Holder!”, but who are you? What difference does how happy you allegedly would be make? Nothing.
You have just as many lawyers on your side as the other does AND you have the SCOTUS. No group is better positioned to (and is actually implementing right now) the weaponization of government than the far right.
I want to make sure I understand what you’re saying.
"...continuing the adoption of masks, social distancing, and even lockdowns will be vital in preserving the human race against covid." -Ulysses
"...maybe this was Trump's last attempt to STAY in power by killing the VP, Pelosi and most of Congress." -Greg
"Did you know that about 2% of babies are intersex? That means that they are born with the physical appearance of one sex, but actually have functioning gonads of another. 2%!" -Freon
You have just as many lawyers on your side as the other does AND you have the SCOTUS. No group is better positioned to (and is actually implementing right now) the weaponization of government than the far right.
I want to make sure I understand what you’re saying.
He knows the truth. We literally had a governor issue an executive order to change a statute of limitations law to go after a political opponent.
The fact is the left does this routinely. Look at countries run by the far left. Moderates don’t do this.
And hypothetically, if a future Republican administration does start going after political rivals, of course they’re going to tie some bullshit law to it to give cover of legitimacy.
That’s how it always works.
The Holder/Bannon example really can’t be explained otherwise.
Democrats play to win, and they play their NPC-sheep to just buy into the deception.
"...continuing the adoption of masks, social distancing, and even lockdowns will be vital in preserving the human race against covid." -Ulysses
"...maybe this was Trump's last attempt to STAY in power by killing the VP, Pelosi and most of Congress." -Greg
"Did you know that about 2% of babies are intersex? That means that they are born with the physical appearance of one sex, but actually have functioning gonads of another. 2%!" -Freon
What the democrats did just before the last election. Changing election processes last minute in several states. Was deemed legal.
But it sure smacked of something bad.
Trump supporters or voters can point to vaccine mandates, an installed govt run disinformation governance board, the FBIs and cia lying to media to bury a true story, and support the lie to a Biden days before a debate which he referenced. And the charges against many of the Jan 6 participants were so far and above what anyone in society doing the same thing would get.
I’m not sure the democrats can point to republicans engaging in the same weaponization of justice and abuse of rights. If so, let’s hear the list.
What the democrats did just before the last election. Changing election processes last minute in several states. Was deemed legal.
But it sure smacked of something bad.
Trump supporters or voters can point to vaccine mandates, an installed govt run disinformation governance board, the FBIs and cia lying to media to bury a true story, and support the lie to a Biden days before a debate which he referenced. And the charges against many of the Jan 6 participants were so far and above what anyone in society doing the same thing would get.
I’m not sure the democrats can point to republicans engaging in the same weaponization of justice and abuse of rights. If so, let’s hear the list.
One biggie: they attempted to steal an election. That's the ultimate "weaponization" of the law and abuse of rights.
You have just as many lawyers on your side as the other does AND you have the SCOTUS. No group is better positioned to (and is actually implementing right now) the weaponization of government than the far right.
I want to make sure I understand what you’re saying.
I'm glad you are seeking understanding instead of making more poor assumptions. It's a good change for you.
I am saying that until proven guilty, all those people are presumed innocent, just like Donald is.
I am saying that your side has the same ability to indict as the opposing side. If that is what you want them to do, vote for those who can do it, instead of these ridiculous candidates like Boebert.
And I am saying that if the evidence supports their guilt, I will honor the verdict.
But do NOT complain about lawfare, when your side is leveraging the same legal system in countless frivolous lawsuits to accomplish their own goals. Donald is notorious for doing so, and I've not heard one complaint from you about that.
What you don't like, is when the justice systems holds YOUR people accountable. All other misuse of it is fine to you.
I want to make sure I understand what you’re saying.
I'm glad you are seeking understanding instead of making more poor assumptions. It's a good change for you.
I am saying that until proven guilty, all those people are presumed innocent, just like Donald is.
I am saying that your side has the same ability to indict as the opposing side. If that is what you want them to do, vote for those who can do it, instead of these ridiculous candidates like Boebert.
But I don’t think crimes like contempt of Congress should be punishable by months in prison.
And neither did anybody, really, until the current administration.
Weaponizing the justice system isn’t just about whether or not to bring charges. It’s about maximizing punishment as well, against reason or fairness.
Plenty of examples to pick through where the historical norms of punishment have been ignored in order to target political enemies.
"...continuing the adoption of masks, social distancing, and even lockdowns will be vital in preserving the human race against covid." -Ulysses
"...maybe this was Trump's last attempt to STAY in power by killing the VP, Pelosi and most of Congress." -Greg
"Did you know that about 2% of babies are intersex? That means that they are born with the physical appearance of one sex, but actually have functioning gonads of another. 2%!" -Freon
I'm glad you are seeking understanding instead of making more poor assumptions. It's a good change for you.
I am saying that until proven guilty, all those people are presumed innocent, just like Donald is.
I am saying that your side has the same ability to indict as the opposing side. If that is what you want them to do, vote for those who can do it, instead of these ridiculous candidates like Boebert.
But I don’t think crimes like contempt of Congress should be punishable by months in prison.
And neither did anybody, really, until the current administration.
Weaponizing the justice system isn’t just about whether or not to bring charges. It’s about maximizing punishment as well, against reason or fairness.
Plenty of examples to pick through where the historical norms of punishment have been ignored in order to target political enemies.
I don't consider holding people accountable for crime to be weaponization. And especially for wealthy white men, for too long they have been above the law.
As to the consequence for contempt of Congress, it seems appropriate. Bannon basically got a giant slap on the wrist. He didn't just ignore Congress, he flagrantly bragged about it. He was proud of the fact that he did it, and he fully expected, just like you did, that he would suffer no consequence.
I believe if he had been less overt about his dodging justice, his consequence would have been lower. That's entirely on him.
You keep arguing that because in the past we did something, that forever we should continue doing it, even if it was wrong to do so. I think we are just very different people in this sense. I want our country to iterate and change to be better at adhering to its laws and values. You don't seem to want that.
But I don’t think crimes like contempt of Congress should be punishable by months in prison.
And neither did anybody, really, until the current administration.
Weaponizing the justice system isn’t just about whether or not to bring charges. It’s about maximizing punishment as well, against reason or fairness.
Plenty of examples to pick through where the historical norms of punishment have been ignored in order to target political enemies.
I don't consider holding people accountable for crime to be weaponization. And especially for wealthy white men, for too long they have been above the law.
As to the consequence for contempt of Congress, it seems appropriate. Bannon basically got a giant slap on the wrist. He didn't just ignore Congress, he flagrantly bragged about it. He was proud of the fact that he did it, and he fully expected, just like you did, that he would suffer no consequence.
I believe if he had been less overt about his dodging justice, his consequence would have been lower. That's entirely on him.
You keep arguing that because in the past we did something, that forever we should continue doing it, even if it was wrong to do so. I think we are just very different people in this sense. I want our country to iterate and change to be better at adhering to its laws and values. You don't seem to want that.
Freon
The weaponization we’ve been witnessing is not random. It’s targeted.
I don't consider holding people accountable for crime to be weaponization. And especially for wealthy white men, for too long they have been above the law.
As to the consequence for contempt of Congress, it seems appropriate. Bannon basically got a giant slap on the wrist. He didn't just ignore Congress, he flagrantly bragged about it. He was proud of the fact that he did it, and he fully expected, just like you did, that he would suffer no consequence.
I believe if he had been less overt about his dodging justice, his consequence would have been lower. That's entirely on him.
You keep arguing that because in the past we did something, that forever we should continue doing it, even if it was wrong to do so. I think we are just very different people in this sense. I want our country to iterate and change to be better at adhering to its laws and values. You don't seem to want that.
Freon
The weaponization we’ve been witnessing is not random. It’s targeted.
Targeted? That's a positive spin on viewing those with HUGE evidence against them as innocent.
That darned evidence keeps getting in your way. If there was none, I'd see your point.
But you just don't like your corrupt leaders being held accountable.
But I don’t think crimes like contempt of Congress should be punishable by months in prison.
And neither did anybody, really, until the current administration.
Weaponizing the justice system isn’t just about whether or not to bring charges. It’s about maximizing punishment as well, against reason or fairness.
Plenty of examples to pick through where the historical norms of punishment have been ignored in order to target political enemies.
I don't consider holding people accountable for crime to be weaponization. And especially for wealthy white men, for too long they have been above the law.
As to the consequence for contempt of Congress, it seems appropriate. Bannon basically got a giant slap on the wrist. He didn't just ignore Congress, he flagrantly bragged about it.
1. It’s just so convenient that you’re so gung ho about holding white people accountable for their crimes now. What a remarkable act of morality! And your main response to that is “republicans need better congresspeople and then maybe they can hold democrats who break the law accountable!” Or even better, you pretend the evidence doesn’t exist for perjury, classified document mismanagement, lying to congress, or contempt of congress.
2. “Bragging” isn’t a crime.
"...continuing the adoption of masks, social distancing, and even lockdowns will be vital in preserving the human race against covid." -Ulysses
"...maybe this was Trump's last attempt to STAY in power by killing the VP, Pelosi and most of Congress." -Greg
"Did you know that about 2% of babies are intersex? That means that they are born with the physical appearance of one sex, but actually have functioning gonads of another. 2%!" -Freon
I don't consider holding people accountable for crime to be weaponization. And especially for wealthy white men, for too long they have been above the law.
As to the consequence for contempt of Congress, it seems appropriate. Bannon basically got a giant slap on the wrist. He didn't just ignore Congress, he flagrantly bragged about it.
1. It’s just so convenient that you’re so gung ho about holding white people accountable for their crimes now. What a remarkable act of morality! And your main response to that is “republicans need better congresspeople and then maybe they can hold democrats who break the law accountable!” Or even better, you pretend the evidence doesn’t exist for perjury, classified document mismanagement, lying to congress, or contempt of congress.
2. “Bragging” isn’t a crime.
I don't think there is any way for us to see this in a similar fashion.
I am pleased at the indictments and the consequences I've seen so far. I consider them evidence-based, and within reason.
I hear your views, but you have not convinced me that your complaints are anything besides supporting your leaders, no matter what they do.
I have seen a few Dems get indicted in the last year, and I support that happening, and their consequences. I've yet to see you support ANY far right leaders being held accountable.
This demonstrates hypocrisy to me, a double-standard. I do not have a double-standard, and I am no hypocrite, so your stances on issues are always tainted to me.
You don't even have the self awareness to realize that you are on the side of the jack booted thugs, do you? Have you not witnessed the extremity of liberal efforts to censor and jail their opponents? That YOUR side has pulled out all of the stops in their quest for power?
It's no wonder you were a drone, a stormtrooper, in the military....it's who you are in private.
Cuck invokes the NO U defense.
This same Cuck is about to vote for a man who declared he would be a dictator.
Because FReEDuM!!!!!!!
Or something.
I just pointed out your lies and projection. Are you too much a pussy to defend what you said, boy?
If you'd just lay off of those daily kool-aid enemas, you'd realize how evil and disgusting your ideology has always been.
Anything else, drone?
μολὼν λαβέ "Come and take them!" “Truth crushed to earth is truth still and like a seed will rise again.” - Jefferson Davis
What the democrats did just before the last election. Changing election processes last minute in several states. Was deemed legal.
But it sure smacked of something bad.
Trump supporters or voters can point to vaccine mandates, an installed govt run disinformation governance board, the FBIs and cia lying to media to bury a true story, and support the lie to a Biden days before a debate which he referenced. And the charges against many of the Jan 6 participants were so far and above what anyone in society doing the same thing would get.
I’m not sure the democrats can point to republicans engaging in the same weaponization of justice and abuse of rights. If so, let’s hear the list.
One biggie: they attempted to steal an election. That's the ultimate "weaponization" of the law and abuse of rights.
The big difference is as you say Republicans tried to steal an election the Democrats actually succeeded.
1. It’s just so convenient that you’re so gung ho about holding white people accountable for their crimes now. What a remarkable act of morality! And your main response to that is “republicans need better congresspeople and then maybe they can hold democrats who break the law accountable!” Or even better, you pretend the evidence doesn’t exist for perjury, classified document mismanagement, lying to congress, or contempt of congress.
2. “Bragging” isn’t a crime.
I don't think there is any way for us to see this in a similar fashion.
I am pleased at the indictments and the consequences I've seen so far. I consider them evidence-based, and within reason.
I hear your views, but you have not convinced me that your complaints are anything besides supporting your leaders, no matter what they do.
I have seen a few Dems get indicted in the last year, and I support that happening, and their consequences. I've yet to see you support ANY far right leaders being held accountable.
This demonstrates hypocrisy to me, a double-standard. I do not have a double-standard, and I am no hypocrite, so your stances on issues are always tainted to me.
Freon
You’re deliberately ignoring the point. That’s fine.
We know Clinton and Clinton and Biden and Clapper and Brennan and Eric Holder were committing crimes or in contempt of congress.
None of them were punished.
If you doubt that those crimes existed, then just say that. You kind of already did.
And so we know who the hypocrite is here.
An approved establishment elite is held in contempt of Congress, and there is no punishment. An unapproved rival from an unacceptable political faction does the same thing and he serves time.
You can try to perform the gymnastics necessary to make that ok in your mind, but it’s weaponization of justice.
I don’t think either Holder or Bannon should have gotten anything other than perhaps a fine. But one goes to prison and the other receives no punishment at all.
That’s not the rule of law. That’s the rule of man.
"...continuing the adoption of masks, social distancing, and even lockdowns will be vital in preserving the human race against covid." -Ulysses
"...maybe this was Trump's last attempt to STAY in power by killing the VP, Pelosi and most of Congress." -Greg
"Did you know that about 2% of babies are intersex? That means that they are born with the physical appearance of one sex, but actually have functioning gonads of another. 2%!" -Freon
I don't think there is any way for us to see this in a similar fashion.
I am pleased at the indictments and the consequences I've seen so far. I consider them evidence-based, and within reason.
I hear your views, but you have not convinced me that your complaints are anything besides supporting your leaders, no matter what they do.
I have seen a few Dems get indicted in the last year, and I support that happening, and their consequences. I've yet to see you support ANY far right leaders being held accountable.
This demonstrates hypocrisy to me, a double-standard. I do not have a double-standard, and I am no hypocrite, so your stances on issues are always tainted to me.
Freon
You’re deliberately ignoring the point. That’s fine.
We know Clinton and Clinton and Biden and Clapper and Brennan and Eric Holder were committing crimes or in contempt of congress.
None of them were punished.
If you doubt that those crimes existed, then just say that. You kind of already did.
And so we know who the hypocrite is here.
An approved establishment elite is held in contempt of Congress, and there is no punishment. An unapproved rival from an unacceptable political faction does the same thing and he serves time.
You can try to perform the gymnastics necessary to make that ok in your mind, but it’s weaponization of justice.
I don’t think either Holder or Bannon should have gotten anything other than perhaps a fine. But one goes to prison and the other receives no punishment at all.
That’s not the rule of law. That’s the rule of man.
You know what you choose to see. I know the rule of law. Innocent until proven guilty is how our system works, and even with Donald, I support that view.
Why don't you?
Indict them. I'm 100% for it. Why is your side so incapable of leveraging the justice system? Are they retarded? Donald was going to 'lock her up'. What happened to that? I'd call it EXTREME incompetence, when he had the entire government Republican, and STILL could not do it.
If it's not incompetence, then the ONLY other conclusion is that there simply was not evidence to support it.
And that's where we really differ. You KNOW this and you KNOW that, but I don't say that kind of thing until the evidence is analyzed in a court of law. The media is not to be trusted for those kinds of details, and will spin things in whatever way gets viewers. It's always been that way, and it always will be.
But you hear Fox, and to you, it IS reality. You are NOT a skeptic. I am. I couldn't even imagine being as accepting of BS as you are.