Jump to content

Merrick Garland's cowardice on display, targets 75 year old lady for federal prison time over a protest


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, West said:

Yeah she was. 

Democrats are going full out nazi now against anyone who opposes civil rights abuses

No, she wasn't. That's absurd. There are literally millions of people who share her kooky beliefs but didn't show up at clinics to harass the patients. None of them were arrested. 

Because in America, you're allowed to be stupid and wrong all you like. We only care when your beliefs are expressed as actions that harm others.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Hodad said:

No, she wasn't. That's absurd. There are literally millions of people who share her kooky beliefs but didn't show up at clinics to harass the patients. None of them were arrested. 

Because in America, you're allowed to be stupid and wrong all you like. We only care when your beliefs are expressed as actions that harm others.

You are no longer allowed to have different beliefs than the ESG loonies or risk losing your jobs or worse imprisoned for speaking out about their barbarianism. 

These people are sick and you just don't care

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, West said:

You are no longer allowed to have different beliefs than the ESG loonies or risk losing your jobs or worse imprisoned for speaking out about their barbarianism. 

These people are sick and you just don't care

Or practices equality of sick...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Because in America, you're allowed to be stupid and wrong all you like. We only care when your beliefs are expressed as actions that harm others.

Well, some of us do. You seem to have no problem when it is protestors you like out blocking others' movements. Or am I mistaking you with someone else I have argued with in the past on here? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, User said:

Well, some of us do. You seem to have no problem when it is protestors you like out blocking others' movements. Or am I mistaking you with someone else I have argued with in the past on here? 

Blocking access to abortion clinics is a Federal crime. Duh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, User said:

Well, some of us do. You seem to have no problem when it is protestors you like out blocking others' movements. Or am I mistaking you with someone else I have argued with in the past on here? 

More likely mischaracterization than mistake.

Don't forget that FACE also protects people going into places of worship. 

7 hours ago, West said:

You are no longer allowed to have different beliefs than the ESG loonies or risk losing your jobs or worse imprisoned for speaking out about their barbarianism. 

These people are sick and you just don't care

You're simply fabricating this claim from whole cloth--lying. 

If anyone is sick in this scenario, it's you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Hodad said:

More likely mischaracterization than mistake.

What was your opinion again on all those BLM protestors in the streets blocking people?

 

12 hours ago, robosmith said:

Blocking access to abortion clinics is a Federal crime. Duh

It is a crime for Hamas-supporting protestors to block traffic and public right of ways too... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, User said:

What was your opinion again on all those BLM protestors in the streets blocking people?

 

It is a crime for Hamas-supporting protestors to block traffic and public right of ways too... 

Blocking traffic is not ideal, but protests (or celebrations) of all sorts do happen (both permitted and unpermitted) and people occupy space so that's just sort of the reality that occasionally things spill into streets. 

But those general inconveniences are very different from targeting individuals to prevent them from accessing a specific destination. That's decidedly more personal with a very different intent and different outcomes. When protests and celebrations spill into the streets, people just take a different route.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Blocking traffic is not ideal, but protests (or celebrations) of all sorts do happen (both permitted and unpermitted) and people occupy space so that's just sort of the reality that occasionally things spill into streets. 

But those general inconveniences are very different from targeting individuals to prevent them from accessing a specific destination. That's decidedly more personal with a very different intent and different outcomes. When protests and celebrations spill into the streets, people just take a different route.

 

Ya see @User, it's perfectly OK to block hiways...access to schools...burn down cop shops...even kill...if it's in the name of "equity". But if you happen to be a 75 year old woman trying to block a young woman from killing a baby...that's different. Abortion is a "right" given by the Libbie Gawd.

Now...of the fabled Gawds we humans identify...which one do you figure grants the "right" to kill the unborn?

Libbies...your actions against a 75 year old woman are disgusting. But hey...

At least your Gawd approves.

Edited by Nationalist
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, User said:

And the excuses start flowing. Thanks for proving my point. 

Nah, the only point that has been proven is that you're not good at nuanced thinking. Luckily, our legal framework and jurisprudence are considerably more sophisticated, having long ago rejected simplistic consequentialism in favor of a more nuanced understanding of the world. The difference between a crime of passion that results in death is meaningfully different from an act of terrorism that results in death. But apparently it's all the same to you. 🤷‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Nah, the only point that has been proven is that you're not good at nuanced thinking. Luckily, our legal framework and jurisprudence are considerably more sophisticated, having long ago rejected simplistic consequentialism in favor of a more nuanced understanding of the world. The difference between a crime of passion that results in death is meaningfully different from an act of terrorism that results in death. But apparently it's all the same to you. 🤷‍♂️

See @User? Its "nuance".

For instance...

If Trump has classified documents in his home...packed by others and sent to his home...he deserves a swat team to raid his home and snif Melania's panties.

But "nuance" dictates that Brandon can have all the classified documents he wants. It doesn't matter that he was not POTUS when he took them...on his own. He's not all there and can't be prosecuted.

Or if Roger Stone is accused of purgery and obstruction, again...call CNN...and send an armed team to get the old man out of bed and put him in jail in his PJs. 

But "nuance" dictates that we can see Brandon is not a cognitive mess, that he has profited from selling out America, that Garland can lie to the American people and create a bunch of political prisoners...and nothing can be done.

See how that works?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

Nah, the only point that has been proven is that you're not good at nuanced thinking.

LOL

Yeah, sure. Nucance thinking for you:

Protestors you like and agree with = you will ignore and/or play down excuse/justify their lawlessness. Protestors you don't agree with = hammer them with the full might and fury of the law and more. Screw em. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

See @User? Its "nuance".

For instance...

If Trump has classified documents in his home...packed by others and sent to his home...he deserves a swat team to raid his home and snif Melania's panties.

But "nuance" dictates that Brandon can have all the classified documents he wants. It doesn't matter that he was not POTUS when he took them...on his own. He's not all there and can't be prosecuted.

Or if Roger Stone is accused of purgery and obstruction, again...call CNN...and send an armed team to get the old man out of bed and put him in jail in his PJs. 

But "nuance" dictates that we can see Brandon is not a cognitive mess, that he has profited from selling out America, that Garland can lie to the American people and create a bunch of political prisoners...and nothing can be done.

See how that works?

Sorry, but you're in the same boat. The differences between the Biden/Pence document situations and the Trump document situation aren't even nuanced. Night and day. Apples and watermelons. 

37 minutes ago, User said:

LOL

Yeah, sure. Nucance thinking for you:

Protestors you like and agree with = you will ignore and/or play down excuse/justify their lawlessness. Protestors you don't agree with = hammer them with the full might and fury of the law and more. Screw em. 

 

Eh, I can give you the definitions, but I can't upgrade your processor. 🤷‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Eh, I can give you the definitions, but I can't upgrade your processor.

I don't need you to help me out here. 

I hope you can one day be more consistent in supporting laws and opposition to lawlessness. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Sorry, but you're in the same boat. The differences between the Biden/Pence document situations and the Trump document situation aren't even nuanced. Night and day. Apples and watermelons. 

Eh, I can give you the definitions, but I can't upgrade your processor. 🤷‍♂️

You're a liar and a dope if you think your "nuance" holds any water.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Deluge said:

democrats will feel better once half of America is imprisoned. 

Or trump wins back the whitehouse and turns their lawfare on them. They'll be safe from Trump...behind bars.

Edited by Nationalist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Or trump wins back the whitehouse and turns their lawfare on them. They'll be safe from Trump...behind bars.

That's true. Trump wouldn't order "hits" on prisoners like the democrats would. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, User said:

I don't need you to help me out here. 

I hope you can one day be more consistent in supporting laws and opposition to lawlessness. 

 

 

Eh, it might not be me, but you clearly need somebody to help you out. 

You pretended as if a protest that spills into the streets and generally slows traffic is somehow directly analogous to targeted harassment of people trying to access clinics and churches. 

In your mind, someone was "blocked" from going somewhere, so they must be the same. 

Well, no, they're not the same for multiple reasons that should be pretty easy to grasp. 

If you can't understand the reasons, you definitely need some help. The rest of society does understand, and those differences are reflected in our legal system. Nuance is why we have so many different flavors of homicide in our laws. Sure, in every case someone killed someone else, but they motive, intent and manner create different crimes. 

38 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

You're a liar and a dope if you think your "nuance" holds any water.

Sometimes I really can't help but pity you. The amount of the world you can't understand is just staggering. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Eh, it might not be me, but you clearly need somebody to help you out. 

You pretended as if a protest that spills into the streets and generally slows traffic is somehow directly analogous to targeted harassment of people trying to access clinics and churches. 

In your mind, someone was "blocked" from going somewhere, so they must be the same. 

Well, no, they're not the same for multiple reasons that should be pretty easy to grasp. 

If you can't understand the reasons, you definitely need some help. The rest of society does understand, and those differences are reflected in our legal system. Nuance is why we have so many different flavors of homicide in our laws. Sure, in every case someone killed someone else, but they motive, intent and manner create different crimes. 

Sometimes I really can't help but pity you. The amount of the world you can't understand is just staggering. 

You want "nuance"? Here...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Hodad said:

You pretended

So, your entire convoluted response is just a big strawman. 

I never pretended any such thing. 

My point was quite simple. Both are lawless, and both have consequences. You condone, justify, excuse one, and mercilessly want the full force of the law hammer brought down on the other. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, User said:

So, your entire convoluted response is just a big strawman. 

I never pretended any such thing. 

My point was quite simple. Both are lawless, and both have consequences. You condone, justify, excuse one, and mercilessly want the full force of the law hammer brought down on the other. 

 

 

Lol. Nice try, but you did pretend they are the same and continue to do so, in service of a very stupid game of "gotcha." I react to things differently when they are different. By pretending that there is something wrong in my doing so, you must necessarily pretend that the examples are not different, but rather the same. That's the only way I can be called out as inconsistent or hypocritical. Which is the entire premise of this conversation, no?

But that's just not how reason works, nor how our law is structured in this society. If you can't understand the distinctions after they are pointed out multiple times, I'm probably not going to be able to help you. And if you CAN understand them, then maybe drop this line of conversation and move on to something more useful and less, well, stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hodad said:

Lol. Nice try, but you did pretend they are the same and continue to do so

Only the same in that they are both illegal. 

It is not a stupid gotcha at all. It is a straight-up 100% I did get you. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,755
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Joe
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Venandi went up a rank
      Community Regular
    • Matthew earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Fluffypants went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Joe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Matthew went up a rank
      Explorer
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...