The Sweet Summer Child is now a moody adolescent.
ok I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt here, what’s your suggestion for what should be done RIGHT NOW? Like, yes, ideally we should have an impartial superbeing making these determinations, but until we get that, should humans in the positions to do something about crime just not take any action if the alledged criminal has any political opinions at all? give me something mroe than handwringing.
1 Like
There was a time long ago that I briefly thought that maybe we shouldn’t punch Nazis on sight.
1 Like
This happens when justice itself becomes a partisan issue.
1 Like
Inglorious Basterds teaches us what to do with Nazis.
2 Likes
In other news, I’ve heard there’s some kind of unknown respiratory illness causing pneumonia in Wuhan. I wonder if we should be concerned about that. Also, I think MySpace might get overtaken by Facebook one of these days.
9 Likes
Look, I’m not at all happy with how Garland has handled this to date. It’s BEYOND obvious to any objective observer that multiple people have committed very serious felonies and that they all should be in orange jumpsuits by now. By all accounts it appears that justice is NOT being served in the least
That said, unlike a lot of people here, I concede I don’t know every aspect of what’s going on behind the scenes. And yes… I still hold out hope that our justice system will prevail. That Garland is not some coward or idiot that doesn’t realize that doing nothing is more of a political statement than doing what’s right
But to answer your question of what should be done now is that the judicial system should simply do its job, which I think it ultimately will. I can’t get behind supporting political prosecutions
What exactly does this mean?
And what should happen if it doesn’t?
I’m also confused on what you mean by “getting behind political prosecutions”.
Even excluding politics, forum shopping to get a favorable judge or potential jury pool is a very real thing in the legal field. There is no such thing as truly impartiality. Every person has inherant bias in one way or another they may or may not even be aware of.
I am sure that Trump has committed an untold number of crimes (civil and criminal) in his lifetime and many while he was president. For obvious reasons he was not investigated while he was president. Once he was no longer president some entities have belatedly begun investigations that could, potentially, lead to indictments. Calling that sequences of events Democrats pursuing “political prosecutions” is mind-boggling.
1 Like
Thread keeps making me think of this, but maybe Wag the Dog is more apt.
Nobody’s saying take him out beyond the sheriff’s office and shoot him, or have a show trial and jail him. We’ve been calling for Democrats to follow the law and do the right thing for months/years, which is to prosecute him for obvious crimes and let a jury decide.
Someone should photoshop that book cover to put a gravestone with his name on it.
2 Likes
I’m not calling it that. I’m calling for Democrats to refrain from asking Democrats to prosecute a politician
There will always be judges and juries who lean left and right. You can’t take the human element completely out of law. All I’m taking issue with is this:
I’m not even sure what this means. Democrats aren’t supposed to prosecute. Or am I misinformed about that? Even the J6 select committee while formed under a Democratic house is supposed to be a non partisan investigation and they can’t prosecute. The DoJ does (another entity which is supposed to act in a non partisan manner)
1 Like
Every single federal judge has been appointed by either a Democrat or a Republican president and confirmed by the Senate. It’s a highly partisan process especially lately. Federal prosecutors are headed up by political appointees.
Our judicial system is highly partisan whether you want it to be or not.
cant you just send em all to an s3 bucket or something like a cache