BeaverFever

Let me guess “racist as hell” against white people right? Lmao The statistics don’t lie: AFTER ALL OTHER FACTORS ARE ACCOUNTED FOR, Black people face harsher treatment from school officials, police, courts, juries employers, landlords etc. Lawmakers have all kinds of laws that unfairly punish black people Black students are 3x more likely to be suspended from school than white students FOR THE SAME OFFENCES US had harsher drug penalties ONLY for crack cocaine which disproportionately affects black people but not for drugs that disproportionately affect white people like powder cocaine or meth. Black drivers are far more likely to be stopped by police for no reason or for minor reasons like jaywalking and those incidents for alleged minor infractions are more likely to result in police brutality and/or “piling on” of additional charges like resisting arrest, obstruction, etc. When an accused first offender commits a minor crime and is white, juries are more open to the idea that the accused is a good person who did a bad thing, or is at least a person capable of feeling remorse, learning and reforming. But when they are black, they are presumed to be natural lifelong criminals who finally got caught and revealed their true nature Criminal sentences for black people are on average 20% more likely to be sentenced to jail time than white people convicted of the same offences and with similar criminal history, and their jail sentences are also on average 20% longer Researchers regularly send out identical resumes, some with “white” names and others with conspicuously black (or other ethnic) names and the non-whites get fewer callbacks from employers Market surveys of homebuyers consistently show that black house-seekers are shown and told about fewer homes for sale by their realtors compared to white house-seekers. US Realtors show fewer homes to US Realtors show fewer homes to The people making these decisions claim they’re not doing it because of skin colour but their judgment of the individuals character, unaware that their subjective judgment if their character is subconsciously based on skin colour. Here are a couple of explainer vids.

It’s hilarious that you don’t see any racism in that making Black history the only part of the curriculum that’s optional. Seriously It shows that don’t consider black people to be equal citizens and their American experience is optional and irrelevant Can people opt out of other history lessons ? Nope. Can black people opt of white history? Nope. And the “black history” is just one lesson and on one day.

Nothing is more un-American than Trump’s desire to be an ally of Russia against the West. This week he’s praising Russian aggression: The praise didn’t end there. “So Putin is now saying, ‘It’s independent,’ a large section of Ukraine," Trump continued. "I said, ‘How smart is that?’ And he’s going to go in and be a peacekeeper. That’s the strongest peace force. We could use that on our southern border. That’s the strongest peace force I’ve ever seen." He then called Putin a “very savvy” person whom he claimed to know “very, very well.”

Evey 5 minutes I have to debunk your Republican Robert Byrd bullshit. You obviously know SFA about him, you’re just repeating words you don’t understand. Meanwhile, in Red State Indiana, a school sends a letter home to parents telling them they can opt their kids out of learning about black history month

As I understand it, South Korea is effectively an oligarchy that has quite a bit of corruption by western standards and much of the economy is owned or controlled by a cabal of uber-rich families that hold a lot of political power.

The fact that you Republicans are so concerned with “race hustlers” when we know racism is real and pervasive and systemic, you guys eager to cherry/pick the specific instances where the allegation is disproven or simply can’t be proven. Another example of Red State racism: Indiana school sends letter home to parents telling them they can opt their kids out of black history month lessons https://www.wthr.com/amp/article/news/education/brown-county-spurnica-elementary-school-letter-gives-families-choice-to-opt-out-of-black-history-month-lessons/531-a0ac921e-aa2f-4bcb-b4e7-33c819441fab

Trying to hide your party’s blatant racism by accusing others of racism is childish. For example why are you insisting that these same black people with no voter ID are buying alcohol ? Do you assume that because they’re black they must be regularly buying alcohol? Here’s an example of how Republicans have used the ID law to disenfranchise blacks in various Ref States: they accept a concealed gun permit and active military ID, which are predominantly held by right-leaning white voters but not Veteran ID, social assistance ID or state/municipal employee ID which are held by minorities in higher then normal proportions and also represent demographics that tend to vote Democrat. They also don’t accept student ID because students tend to be liberals. They deliberately make getting basic ID expensive and inconvenient by requiring specific documentation that they know low income people often lack, such as long-form birth certificates that can cost $100 or more to obtain from state records and can take weeks or months to obtain. And of course because its the USA, getting anything from any government office is a huge inconvenient time suck with hours spent standing in line because in America, government offices are chronically starved of funds and designed to to suck on purpose for ideological reasons. Especially if you’re poor

Republican fascism on display as GOP extremists get violent with each other at a meeting where some try to banish others who don’t bow down to the official party line. Yelling and mayhem ensues, and of course an angry Republican man gets physical with a disobedient woman Former county commissioner accused of assault at GOP meeting …The police report provides a glimpse into the goings-on of the local GOP, which has been divided over a variety of issues, most recently a new proposed policy that would allow party members to be "exiled," as the Times Recorder put it, from the GOP for not embracing the Republican Party platform. https://www.csindy.com/news/local/former-county-commissioner-accused-of-assault-at-gop-meeting/article_88ce791c-8dba-11ec-bc73-9794ee08d02c.html

I don’t think there’s anything “great”about any person. I know hero worship is popular with conservatives but it’s an idiotic concept. I know Sharpton is hated by conservatives because he’s a civil rights activist. Why don’t you tell me what you think is so terrible about that man?

Yes are you retarded I’m accusing conservatives of saying black people are criminals. As was exactly the case with Trayvonn Martin. Conservatives always try to imply that Black people are criminals and that criminals are mostly black people. Whenever a police officer kills a black person without justification the conservatives always take the cops side and claim the black person deserved it. Damn near 100% of the time

I never said they are incapable of getting ID. I said someone who doesn’t own a car or travel abroad shouldn’t have to go through the expense and inconvenience just to appease Republican crooks and liars. Many states especially Red states make obtaining ID costly and inconvenient on purpose as part of their disenfranchisement agenda which is mot only aimed at Blacks and minorities but low income citizens generally. If there’s so much fraud how come you can’t produce any evidence of it? Your racism is sick.

1. I said yes 2. WTF is that supposed to mean? You’re just calling me racist for no reason and when asked to explain yourself you simply repeat it. How choldish and vulgar. Conservatives always are on the side of the racists. Pro-confederate flag, pro-confederate statues, always doubt the black person killed by police, anti-affirmative action, hate Jesse Jackson, hate Al Sharpton, hate Jon Lewis, hate every civil rights activist who hasn’t been dead for at least half a century. Now they’re out there banning books about racism and trying to convince people that racism doesn’t exist or that it’s just a private personal problem for each individual experiencing it and its anti-American for anyone to even discuss it publicly.

You are correct that judges and courts are jot involved in making the law. The law gets made in parliament by the Legislative and Executive branches and once it gets passed it then receives Royal Assent (which is a symbolic formality) and that’s it, it’s been made and it is now the law of the land. If you violate it then you’re subject to whatever penalized it specifies….. BUT THEN concerned citizens, interest groups etc can launch a legal challenge of the law for various reasons including that they believe it violates the constitution and THAT is when the courts get involved. Even if they don’t launch a legal challenge as soon as someone gets charged under the law and defends themselves in court (as opposed to just pleading guilty). The point is that someone must actually make an effort to challenge the law in court, it doesn’t happen automatically when the law is made. Then a judge can rule that the law is deficient (again for any number of reasons, not just constitutionality) Those other reasons include that the law contradicts another law, or is too unclear to be applied, and sometimes even based on how the court feels a reasonable person acting in good faith would behave in real-life situations. This is what it means to “interpret” the law: what does it mean and did this accused person violate that meaning? For example: The law says you cannot use a firearm in a reckless and dangerous manner. But what qualifies as “reckless” or “dangerous” and did the actions of the accused actually meet this qualification? What if the accused is a firearms expert and champion marksman, vs if he is someone who has never held a gun before? And what difference, if any, should that make in their particular case? Perhaps because he’s an expert and knew exactly what he was doing it wasn’t reckless. Or perhaps because he’s an expert he ought to have known better. It depends on the specific situation. Only the courts can decide these kinds of things So your question is why isn’t this done up front during the parliamentary lawmaking process. Well the lawmakers in parliament try, all proposed laws are extensively studied in Committees who hold hearings and receive testimony from various experts, concerned citizens etc but they can’t think of every possible hypothetical situation where a well-meaning law could be applied in real life. And politicians in parliament don’t necessarily give the same weight to the arguments they hear in committee as a judge would in court with lawyers strongly debating both sides.

Legislature (ie the politicians elected to sit in parliament) writes and passes laws by introducing them to parliament and then voting on them. The party that won the most parliament seats in the last election can typically get their way over the other parties in parliament because having more seats mean they have more votes (in the case of a minority government like we have now, they have to make a deal with another party in the legislature to get them to vote the same way). The laws that parliament makes must abide by the constitution. If the court rules they are unconstitutional then the law is effectively null and void. Think about it: the attorney general/Minister of Justice is a member of the Prime Minister’s party and is appointed to his job by the Prime Minister. The people appointed by the Prime Minister to run the various government departments and agencies are called Cabinet Ministers and the Minister of Justice is one of them.Pretty much all laws passed by parliament are introduced by a Cabinet Minister, often the Minister of Justice was directly involved in writing the law or is even the one intending it. Why would they rule their own laws unconstitutional? The courts (aka the Judicial branch of government) is independent from the elected (legislative) branch and it is also independent from the the Prime Minister, Cabinet and the departments they control (collectively called the executive branch). That means the Prime Minister cannot fire judges or tell the courts what to say or do, a general cannot have judges arrested, and government agencies and departments cannot ignore judges rulings. You are correct that the courts interpret the law, this includes the constitution. Heres an explanatory video

1. Let me guess in your version she was shot in the back of the head execution style 20 miles away for the Capitol. Yes I’ve seen the video She jumped up into the smashed window frame and was shot The shooting was investigated and ruled legit. 2. What BS. In what way is calling out others’ racism walking a fine line of racism?

Sorry, but you don’t understand how democracy works. SCOC alone decides whether a law is constitutional not the elected politicians. The whole point of the constitution is to limit the power of elected politicians…..(notwithstanding clause notwithstanding). You also have the facts of the SNC Lavalin case wrong…no laws were struck down and nothing was found to be unconstitutional

Huh? The reason Republicans want voter ID is because they know poor (read: black) people who don’t own a car and don’t travel abroad aren’t likely to have a drivers license or passport and therefore won’t be able to vote.

Her mob smashed a window despite the cops on the other side already having guns drawn. She tried to jump through it and the predictable happened. If you’re like your fellow right wingers you do base your morality on skin colour. They don’t say black people deserve to he shot, they say dangerous criminals deserve to he shot…then look for any excuse to claim the black person was a dangerous criminal.

ID doesn’t prove you’re a citizen eligible to vote. People whose are not eligible to vote or who are not citizens still have ID. The state already has a list of people who are eligible to vote so the only way you could commit voter fraud is to claim you’re someone else already on the list and then you’ll get caught when you’re told that other person already voted, or if you cote first your vote will get thrown out when that other person shows up and proves who they are.

She was the only one to die at the hands of a cop, that much is true. But the shooting was ruled as justified considering those 3 cops were the only thing between her violent mob and the US senators. She saw their drawn weapons, was warned, and charged them anyway. If that was a BLM protester with a skateboard or a black kid buying skittles after dark you would not be so sympathetic. She was not however the only death as a result of the riot, I already listed the others.

Some of the rioters came prepared to storm the Capitol with body armour, handcuffs and a homemade gallows to hang Spence and Democrats. Babbit was at the forefront of a violent mob that was mere feet away from evacuating US senators. THREE armed officers who were all that stood between her violent mob and the senators, they rightfully had their guns drawn and gave ample warning to he mob. They had already been informed that pipe bombs had been found and that at least some of the Capitol insurrectionists were armed. She charged anyway like an idiot The claim that officers should have tackled her and put all their effort into restraining her while the rest of the mob tears the senators apart is ridiculous. Republican Representative Markwayne Mullin, a witness to Babbitt's attempted breach, said that the Capitol Police "didn't have a choice" but to shoot, and that this action "saved people's lives". https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Ashli_Babbitt Babbit wasn’t the only death. 4 officers committed suicide as a result, and 1 suffered a stroke whole battling the insurrectionist scum. 140 cops went to hospital with serious injury, many have still not returned to work. Also 2 fat fuck insurrectionists died of heart attacks and one meth-head Trump loving insurrectionist overdosed during the insurrection.

I didn’t say they were all racist or privileged. I said it’s funny that when protesters are conspicuously non-white, conservatives are outraged that anyone would dare disturb polite society and interfere with commerce for their personal issues….and yet now for some reason conservatives are claiming that for this mostly white group - which only has a small amount of Nazis and racists - disturbing polite society and interfering with commerce is a beautifully patriotic duty.

Why not just tie the garbage bag like a normal person? Back to the real topic, you’re seriously pretending you don’t know what zip tie handcuffs are? They are police restraints that go on like zip ties and many of the rioters were carrying them and hunting foe Pence and Democrats. They’re not household zip ties dummy. I don’t believe you’re that stupid

Oh I didn’t say they weed privileged, most are working class. But they are predominately white

Just so we’re all clear on what we’re talking about here: In recent days, the nation has learned that Trump made a habit of tearing up documents while he was in office. There have also been several news reports of Trump administration staffers putting documents in burn bags to be destroyed. On Thursday, New York Times journalist and CNN political analyst Maggie Haberman said staff in the White House residence would periodically find the toilet clogged with "wads of clumped up wet printed paper." (Trump denied her reporting as "categorically untrue.") Additionally, there were at least 15 boxesof documents and other items that the former President took with him to Florida after his term came to a tumultuous close…. Trump issued a statement Thursday saying his discussions with the National Archives about returning records had been "collaborative and respectful," but the National Archives is now asking the Department of Justice to investigate Trump's handling of White House records, according to a source familiar with the matter. https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/02/09/opinions/trump-presidential-records-act-zelizer/index.html ———————- Destroying White House records is a crime. BUT HER EMAILS!???