EE PatronSep 28th 2020, 15:38:06
Holy lord that's a lot to digest for a number of reasons.
First off, I dont know how anyone could support our current cash bail system. Just means if you have money you don't have to go to prison and if you are poor and commit the same crime, the 12th amendment can make you a slave without trial. That's a heck of a system there. We have poor people marinating in jails for years before their trial sometimes.
Isnt the presumption of innocence one of the founding ideals of our justice system? Innocent until proven guilty. Kalief Browder was held for three years at Rikers Island without a trial and committed suicide soon after he was found innocent of stealing a backpack. That's not a working system man.
The bail project merely provides the same rights to poor people as rich people, and does not release any criminals from prison, because again, they are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Basic US law there. Poor people shouldn't have to sit in prison while rich people don't. Justice should come in the same package for everyone and not disproportionately affect poor people.
And I think wanting to reform that system to make it fair does not directly connect you to west coast violence lol. That's crazy. That's a 1+2=4 there where you are taking a giant leap over the main point of bail reform to say somehow the dems want criminals released which is actually not the case. Nor is either candidate endorsing the bail project attempting to undermine the current system. You're choosing to ignore half of this debate to create an anti-democratic narrative, but using a broken system to do so.
By that logic, you could directly connect the Trump campaign endorsing the unite the right rally that ended in the death of a school teacher in Charlottesville. Trumps campaign quite literally endorsed the rally, but I think it would be a MASSIVE LEAP to say they endorse the violence. Mostly because it just isnt true, no one is endorsing violence. You can take a giant leap on any nonsensical point and make it sound like this.
Roger Stone is a criminal and he got pardoned by trump for witness tampering and perjury. Do you think then trump supports witness tampering and perjury and that's why he pardoned stone? Or do you think he probably doesnt support witness tampering but pardoned stone for other reasons? I'm not going to make a leap there and say trump is pro-perjury because that is a stupid nonsensical point.
The boogaloo movement supports trump and is actively attempting to start a 2nd civil war. Is trump then also attempting to start a 2nd civil war? I'd guess not. Another nonsensical leap.
On the last bit, I'm still not sure how someone could say that about the dems but not the reps. Trump is the dog to bidens pony. It's all very much a show...and I think anyone wanting to wear a hat and be proud of this corrupt ass system we have to deal with is an ignoramus.
It does, however, shock me that BOTH SIDES want to blame the other political party for extremist violence. I think if you are going to feel that way, I can run that list of far right extremist terrorist attacks from the last 5 years again, and we can talk about Jared Loughner some more. You cant connect one extreme to a moderate politcal party, but not the other extreme to its moderate equivalent. That's a savage hypocrisy. Either the political parties "endorse violence" thru riling up its fringe base, or neither does. You cant make an exemption for far right extremism while wholeheartedly placing blame for far left extremism. That's legitimately just a proclamation of politcal affiliation and a willingness to be a hypocrite to defend your side.
The dems are responsible for far left violence in all of the exact same ways that the reps are responsible for far right violence. Both political parties behave extremely similarly on that so I'd say make the plunge together or stop claiming its somehow different. It isnt. "Your side is violent and my side isn't" is just a wildly inaccurate depiction of politically motivated violence in this country for anyone on either side. Again. Jared Loughner was the only member of this community that I've known to engage in politically charged violence, and he was a right wing extremist. You boys either need to start taking responsibility for assisting in his radicalization here, or stop blaming others for violence if that's not the way that happens. It's not different for both parties.
Drawing the connection that all dems are responsible for far left violence or calling me riotous or associated with antifa is the EXACT SAME THING as blaming the Republicans and the radicalization by this community for the Tuscon shooting. So which is it?
First off, I dont know how anyone could support our current cash bail system. Just means if you have money you don't have to go to prison and if you are poor and commit the same crime, the 12th amendment can make you a slave without trial. That's a heck of a system there. We have poor people marinating in jails for years before their trial sometimes.
Isnt the presumption of innocence one of the founding ideals of our justice system? Innocent until proven guilty. Kalief Browder was held for three years at Rikers Island without a trial and committed suicide soon after he was found innocent of stealing a backpack. That's not a working system man.
The bail project merely provides the same rights to poor people as rich people, and does not release any criminals from prison, because again, they are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Basic US law there. Poor people shouldn't have to sit in prison while rich people don't. Justice should come in the same package for everyone and not disproportionately affect poor people.
And I think wanting to reform that system to make it fair does not directly connect you to west coast violence lol. That's crazy. That's a 1+2=4 there where you are taking a giant leap over the main point of bail reform to say somehow the dems want criminals released which is actually not the case. Nor is either candidate endorsing the bail project attempting to undermine the current system. You're choosing to ignore half of this debate to create an anti-democratic narrative, but using a broken system to do so.
By that logic, you could directly connect the Trump campaign endorsing the unite the right rally that ended in the death of a school teacher in Charlottesville. Trumps campaign quite literally endorsed the rally, but I think it would be a MASSIVE LEAP to say they endorse the violence. Mostly because it just isnt true, no one is endorsing violence. You can take a giant leap on any nonsensical point and make it sound like this.
Roger Stone is a criminal and he got pardoned by trump for witness tampering and perjury. Do you think then trump supports witness tampering and perjury and that's why he pardoned stone? Or do you think he probably doesnt support witness tampering but pardoned stone for other reasons? I'm not going to make a leap there and say trump is pro-perjury because that is a stupid nonsensical point.
The boogaloo movement supports trump and is actively attempting to start a 2nd civil war. Is trump then also attempting to start a 2nd civil war? I'd guess not. Another nonsensical leap.
On the last bit, I'm still not sure how someone could say that about the dems but not the reps. Trump is the dog to bidens pony. It's all very much a show...and I think anyone wanting to wear a hat and be proud of this corrupt ass system we have to deal with is an ignoramus.
It does, however, shock me that BOTH SIDES want to blame the other political party for extremist violence. I think if you are going to feel that way, I can run that list of far right extremist terrorist attacks from the last 5 years again, and we can talk about Jared Loughner some more. You cant connect one extreme to a moderate politcal party, but not the other extreme to its moderate equivalent. That's a savage hypocrisy. Either the political parties "endorse violence" thru riling up its fringe base, or neither does. You cant make an exemption for far right extremism while wholeheartedly placing blame for far left extremism. That's legitimately just a proclamation of politcal affiliation and a willingness to be a hypocrite to defend your side.
The dems are responsible for far left violence in all of the exact same ways that the reps are responsible for far right violence. Both political parties behave extremely similarly on that so I'd say make the plunge together or stop claiming its somehow different. It isnt. "Your side is violent and my side isn't" is just a wildly inaccurate depiction of politically motivated violence in this country for anyone on either side. Again. Jared Loughner was the only member of this community that I've known to engage in politically charged violence, and he was a right wing extremist. You boys either need to start taking responsibility for assisting in his radicalization here, or stop blaming others for violence if that's not the way that happens. It's not different for both parties.
Drawing the connection that all dems are responsible for far left violence or calling me riotous or associated with antifa is the EXACT SAME THING as blaming the Republicans and the radicalization by this community for the Tuscon shooting. So which is it?