- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: All of this "The Law is The Law" B.S. is comical....
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:08 am to Mid Iowa Tiger
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:08 am to Mid Iowa Tiger
quote:
Was the law the law when she had her people cut "Top Secret" off of documents in the SCIF and then scan and send those documents to her?
I can't recall.
This entire fiasco seems to be a present for Democrats who just have wanted to see Trump arrested since he went on campaign.
You could probably find something to arrest most sitting politicians if you chose.
2
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:11 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
You could probably find something to arrest most sitting politicians if you chose.
If you took ONLY the allegations acted upon against Trump as your bar, you could arrest every GE presidential candidate since W.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:12 am to Y.A. Tittle
I'm fine with murder and rape laws, even with that contingency. I was using an example to make an attempted response look as obscene and stupid as it was.
Nobody IIT is arguing for eliminating laws against violent crimes.
I would say property-theft crimes too, but lots of posters apparently have issues with the NYC business records law, so we have to put that to the side for now.
Where we, as a society, need to focus is on is the primary points of unsolicited interaction to reduce intrusion into our lives. We need to reduce the legally valid justifications for intrusion (which will mean fewer laws for minor offenses) AND create higher standards and regulations of LEO when they contemplate or execute these intrusions. Lastly, we need to remove funding for LEO from fines collected/tickets written. These amounts should go into their respective state general funds by law, outside of the control of the locality or policing agency.
That's a good start to the process.
Nobody IIT is arguing for eliminating laws against violent crimes.
I would say property-theft crimes too, but lots of posters apparently have issues with the NYC business records law, so we have to put that to the side for now.
Where we, as a society, need to focus is on is the primary points of unsolicited interaction to reduce intrusion into our lives. We need to reduce the legally valid justifications for intrusion (which will mean fewer laws for minor offenses) AND create higher standards and regulations of LEO when they contemplate or execute these intrusions. Lastly, we need to remove funding for LEO from fines collected/tickets written. These amounts should go into their respective state general funds by law, outside of the control of the locality or policing agency.
That's a good start to the process.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:16 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:No. It sounds like democrats. Whether targeting Blacks under Jim Crow, or white conservatives with Lawfare, it's always democrats.
You know what this sounds like? Leftists
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:20 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
you took ONLY the allegations acted upon against Trump as your bar, you could arrest every GE presidential candidate since W.
I kind of want to wait til it's all official but based on what I've heard I agree with you
I think progressives are trying to force an overeaction
This post was edited on 3/21/23 at 11:23 am
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:23 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
If you took ONLY the allegations acted upon against Trump as your bar, you could arrest every GE presidential candidate since W.
That's the whole point. They can arrest ANY of us, given the state of LEO/Prosecution that we live in and our unimaginable number of criminal laws.
If they can come for Trump, they can come for you, too.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:24 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
You could probably find something to arrest most sitting politicians if you chose.
Probably with the notable exception of Trump. I mean the man has to be the most investigated person in history and not even a late library book.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:27 am to SlowFlowPro
they already are.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:27 am to teke184
Or destruction of evidence after the courts subpoenaed everything.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:30 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
they can come for Trump
Until proven otherwise, I'll assume this is to force overreactions. I think they want insurrection.. or whatever the want to call it
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:32 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I'm ideologically consistent
You know who feels the need to explicitly claim that they're consistent?
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:33 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
they already are.
Well I have to be careful b/c then there will be this weird mental exception for those prosecutions being federal.
But yes, You can include J6 prosecutions with my comments about Trump's prosecutions.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:34 am to Flats
quote:
You know who feels the need to explicitly claim that they're consistent?
People who devote too much time of their life trying to educate sub-95 IQ people posting hyperbolically
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:36 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
sub-95 IQ people
You know who needs to repeatedly make claims about how their intelligence compares to others?
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:37 am to Flats
Yeah I didn't say 120+ IO people. Lots of standard deviations between what you're referencing and what I posted.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:39 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Lots of standard deviations between what you're referencing and what I posted.
You sound like Stuart Smalley. Or hank.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:43 am to Flats
quote:
You know who feels the need to explicitly claim that they're consistent?
I wish I were ideologically consistent, but there are too many issues for that.
I try to be value consistent as much as possible though.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:49 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Did you see the pictures in my post?
He ran as a "law and order" guy from the start. That's literally supporting the Police State.
I believe thats the confusion, supporting police is diametrically opposed to "the police state".
Its akin to saying the allies and the axis are both soldiers so its the same team
Im hoping you are being obtuse and not that ignorant...are you.....well are you?????
Posted on 3/21/23 at 11:50 am to trinidadtiger
quote:
supporting police is diametrically opposed to "the police state".
Its akin to saying the allies and the axis are both soldiers so its the same team
Who do you think executes the policies of the police state?
You need to explain how they are "diametrically opposed" to each other instead of just making a conclusory statement and spiking the football.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 12:01 pm to SlowFlowPro
Some of those folks were state level prosecutions for such atrocities as refusing to mask at a school board meeting and confronting a school board for exposing his child to a trans-bathroom rape. But we can split hairs if you like.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News