Crime Mango Molester's sentencing

[Islam Imamate]

Yes, this ties into our politics becoming extremely hostile, again, on both sides since 2016. Everybody here shares some sort of blame. This shit needs to be dialed down about 5 notches or our democracy is going to crumble.

But not equaly on both sides, one side shares much more blame and refuses to hold their own accountable. To refuse to acknowledge that is to run interference for the more egregious party which I'm sure was your intention.

 

[Domitian]

But not equaly on both sides, one side shares much more blame and refuses to hold their own accountable. To refuse to acknowledge that is to run interference for the more egregious party which I'm sure was your intention.

You're worried about who fucked over who more. This is not a good mindset to have. It's aggressive and only leading to more hostility. The Reps won this election. There will be another election in 2028. Take the L, recoup, come back stronger my guy.

 

[Islam Imamate]

You're worried about who fucked over who more. This is not a good mindset to have. It's aggressive and only leading to more hostility.

I'm worried about who is actually driving the division and degradation of American norms.

People like you are like teachers who watch a kid get bullied all year and at the end when he finally stands up to them you punish both equally to be "fair" but that mindset is the furthest thing from fair. Bullies like Trump love useful idiots such as yourself for that reason.

The Reps won this election. There will be another election in 2028. Take the L, recoup, come back stronger my guy.

I'm not some DNC operative, my primary concern isn't with Dems losing but with Trump winning given he's promised to consolidate power in his own hands and retaliate against his enemies. I would rather Trump get impeached and imprisoned only for another non-MAGA GOP candidate to win in 2028 than see Trump get away with it with no consequences even if it means Dems winning in four years.

 

[Domitian]

I'm worried about who is actually driving the division and degradation of American norms.

People like you are like teachers who watch a kid get bullied all year and at the end when he finally stands up to them you punish both equally to be "fair" but that mindset is the furthest thing from fair. Bullies like Trump love useful idiots such as yourself for that reason.

I'm not some DNC operative, my primary concern isn't with Dems losing but with Trump winning given he's promised to consolidate power in his own hands and retaliate against his enemies. I would rather Trump get impeached and imprisoned only for another non-MAGA GOP candidate to win in 2028 than see Trump get away with it with no consequences even if it means Dems winning in four years.

Why are you making broad assumptions about who I am based off a small interaction? I would absolutely not allow bullying of children for any period of time. I don't even like Trump. He's a sack of shit. All these politicians on both sides are sacks of shit. Newsflash, that's how they got in the position they are in.

Democrats paid hard for the poor decision of running Biden in 2020. That was dumb as fuck considering just about any decent candidate could have beat Trump. You're paying for your own dumbass decisions. That's the reality.

 

[mkess101]

Isn't it telling that he got support by promising to retaliate against those who tried to hold him accountable and the opposition party generally?

So to be clear this is all vibes and isn't based on any evidence right? Just your gut feeling?

I've been pretty clear what it's based on. If you think it wacky that someone believes that a political appointee would feel some level of loyalty to those who gave them the job, that's your right to believe that. Seems naive to me, but I certainly won't tell you that you can't believe that.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Why are you making broad assumptions about who I am based off a small interaction? I would absolutely not allow bullying of children for any period of time. I don't even like Trump. He's a sack of shit. All these politicians on both sides are sacks of shit. Newsflash, that's how they got in the position they are in.

Again with the "both sides" crap. If you can't muster the courage to condemn the side, really the person of Trump, who is more responsible than anyone else for the degradation of our norms of civility then you're useless on this issue. Might as well sit back and enjoy the show instead of trying to wag your finger at me.

Democrats paid hard for the poor decision of running Biden in 2020. That was dumb as fuck considering just about any decent candidate could have beat Trump. You're paying for your own dumbass decisions. That's the reality.

Biden won in 2020, how was that a poor decision?

I've been pretty clear what it's based on.

In other words, yes its based on nothing but your gut feelings.

If you think it wacky that someone believes that a political appointee would feel some level of loyalty to those who gave them the job, that's your right to believe that. Seems naive to me, but I certainly won't tell you that you can't believe that.

I think its wacky to have this much confidence along with your condescension towards me when you're completely clueless of all the relevant details. It shows an utter lack of humility on your part.

Like I said if anything the Feds were exceedingly lenient on Trump and tough on Biden.

 

[Domitian]

Again with the "both sides" crap. If you can't muster the courage to condemn the side, really the person of Trump, who is more responsible than anyone else for the degradation of our norms of civility then you're useless on this issue. Might as well sit back and enjoy the show instead of trying to wag your finger at me.

Biden won in 2020, how was that a poor decision?

In other words, yes its based on nothing but your gut feelings.

I think its wacky to have this much confidence along with your condescension towards me when you're completely clueless of all the relevant details. It shows an utter lack of humility on your part.

Lie I said if anything the Feds were exceedingly lenient on Trump and tough on Biden.

I literally just said Trump is a bag of shit. What more would you like? I wish he never erupted on the scene in 2016 but he did.

Yes, Biden won. He did fucking horrible. Now Trump is back in office. You still think it was a good decision? No, it was a poor decision. Trump was so disliked in 2020 the Dems could have ran much better candidates, but they went with Biden who is corrupt as fuck and old (Just like Trump, so you don't think I'm being unfair).

Your inability to see the Democrats fault is glaring.

 

[mkess101]

Again with the "both sides" crap. If you can't muster the courage to condemn the side, really the person of Trump, who is more responsible than anyone else for the degradation of our norms of civility then you're useless on this issue. Might as well sit back and enjoy the show instead of trying to wag your finger at me.

Biden won in 2020, how was that a poor decision?

In other words, yes its based on nothing but your gut feelings.

I think its wacky to have this much confidence along with your condescension towards me when you're completely clueless of all the relevant details. It shows an utter lack of humility on your part.

Lie I said if anything the Feds were exceedingly lenient on Trump and tough on Biden.

That much confidence in what? What level of "confidence" do you ascribe to me? How much of the motivation do you assert that I'm claiming is due to politics? If I come across as condescending, it's only because you've tried (as you are right now) framing my view to suit your narrative.

You simply don't want to acknowledge that this situation (as all are in politics) is complex. With a multitude of motivations and actions existing simultaneously. And with them also shifting as things change. I'm sorry (well... not really sorry) I won't buy into your rigid black and white view that things are all one way or the other. Or that assessing human nature is something you think of as irrelevant sans hard evidence about what's going on inside someone's head.

 

[Islam Imamate]

That much confidence in what? What level of "confidence" do you ascribe to me? How much of the motivation do you assert that I'm claiming is due to politics? If I come across as condescending, it's only because you've tried (as you are right now) framing my view to suit your narrative.

You're calling me naïve for actually knowing what I'm talking about while your opinion is completely untethered from what actually happened.

You simply don't want to acknowledge that this situation (as all are in politics) is complex. With a multitude of motivations and actions existing simultaneously. And with them also shifting as things change. I'm sorry (well... not really sorry) I won't buy into your rigid black and white view that things are all one way or the other. Or that assessing human nature is something you think of as irrelevant sans hard evidence about what's going on inside someone's head.

I am the one who is acknowledging the complexity here, you are boiling it down to "everyone is politically motivated" without any regard for the actual facts of the matter.

If you have no idea "what's going on inside someone's head" then what makes you think there was political motivation here? If anything you're the one claiming to be able to read minds here, that without any evidence you can confidently assume that the DOJ was politically motivated to go after Trump. I make no such claims, I try to stick to the evidence.

I literally just said Trump is a bag of shit. What more would you like? I wish he never erupted on the scene in 2016 but he did.

I would like for the "both sides" crap to stop. If you can't muster the courage to condemn the side that is more egregious then at the very least don't wag your finger at me.

 

[Domitian]

You're calling me naïve for actually knowing what I'm talking about while your opinion is completely untethered from what actually happened.

I am the one who is acknowledging the complexity here, you are boiling it down to "everyone is politically motivated" without any regard for the actual facts of the matter.

If you have no idea "what's going on inside someone's head" then what makes you think there was political motivation here? If anything you're the one claiming to be able to read minds here, that without any evidence you can confidently assume that the DOJ was politically motivated to go after Trump. I make no such claims, I try to stick to the evidence.

I would like for the "both sides" crap to stop. If you can't muster the courage to condemn the side that is more egregious then at the very least don't wag your finger at me.

Brother, I'm trying to figure out solutions here for you to win. The first step in that is examining the problem and why you lost. Defeating Trump permanently should have been a layup.

Also recognizing that this hostility between the Reps and Dems is consistently escalating and it needs to be dialed down for the sake of everybody. I'm not just talking to Dems here.

The answer is not to instigate a civil war. The answer is to go back in the lab and figure out how to win again in 2028.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Brother, I'm trying to figure out solutions here for you to win. The first step in that is examining the problem and why you lost. Defeating Trump permanently should have been a layup.

Dems lost in all likelihood because of the same reason every other incumbent party in the developed world lost, because of inflation. Trump was beaten twice in a row, once in 2020 and again in 2022 when Trump's GOP bungled the "red wave" but with enough time the electorate will always sour on the incumbent party.

Also recognizing that this hostility between the Reps and Dems is consistently escalating and it needs to be dialed down for the sake of everybody. I'm not just talking to Dems here.

You made it a point to wag your finger at me though and people like you pretty much always single out Trump's critics for your finger wagging rather than Trumpers.

The answer is not to instigate a civil war. The answer is to go back in the lab and figure out how to win again in 2028.

But again the lesson learned from this election would suggest the opposite, that the Trump playbook works fine and might as well race to the bottom.

In reality, inflation was the main reason Dems lost and my guess is the GOP would've won an actual landslide victory had they run someone other than Trump. Compared to all the other countries in the developed world the Dems lost the least vote share and that's likely due to a combination of our stronger economy and the fact that Trump is a weak candidate.

 

[mkess101]

You're calling me naïve for actually knowing what I'm talking about while your opinion is completely untethered from what actually happened.

I am the one who is acknowledging the complexity here, you are boiling it down to "everyone is politically motivated" without any regard for the actual facts of the matter.

If you have no idea "what's going on inside someone's head" then what makes you think there was political motivation here? If anything you're the one claiming to be able to read minds here, that without any evidence you can confidently assume that the DOJ was politically motivated to go after Trump. I make no such claims, I try to stick to the evidence.

I would like for the "both sides" crap to stop. If you can't muster the courage to condemn the side that is more egregious then at the very least don't wag your finger at me.

Why do you think they "went easy" on Trump? What was the motivation for that?

 

[Domitian]

Dems lost in all likelihood because of the same reason every other incumbent party in the developed world lost, because of inflation. Trump was beaten twice in a row, once in 2020 and again in 2022 when Trump's GOP bungled the "red wave" but with enough time the electorate will always sour on the incumbent party.

You made it a point to wag your finger at me though and people like pretty much always single out Trump's critics for your finger wagging rather than Trumpers.

But again the lesson learned from this election would suggest the opposite, that the Trump playbook works fine and might as well race to the bottom.

In reality, inflation was the main reason Dems lost and my guess is the GOP would've won an actual landslide victory had they run someone other than Trump. Compared to all the other countries in the developed world the Dems lost the least vote share and that's likely due to a combination of our stronger economy and the fact that Trump is a weak candidate.

I apologize if that's how you interpreted our interaction. That wasn't my intention and I'm sorry about that. I'm just as disgusted with Trump's division of the country. I don't claim either the Democrats or the Republicans, but I wish they would stop constantly slinging shit at each other.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Why do you think they "went easy" on Trump? What was the motivation for that?

Jack Smith was only appointed by Merrick Garland in November 2022 and given the sensitive nature of the case that was late enough that it gave Trump the chance to do what he ended up doing which is run again to kill the case.

I believe Garland did so to avoid the impression that the investigation was politically motivated in the eyes of the public but it was a mistake as evidenced by your take, it was always going to be seen as political by the low info voter.

 

[mkess101]

Jack Smith was only appointed by Merrick Garland in November 2022 and given the sensitive nature of the case that was late enough that it gave Trump the chance to do what he ended up doing which is run again to kill the case.

I believe Garland did so to avoid the impression that the investigation was politically motivated in the eyes of the public but it was a mistake as evidenced by your take, it was always going to be seen as political by the low info voter.

Did Garland say anything alluding to him having those specific motivations? That he wanted to give the appearance of fairness?

 

[Islam Imamate]

Did Garland say anything alluding to him having those specific motivations? That he wanted to give the appearance of fairness?

Yes and its widely thought that's why Garland was chosen.

The judge also said restoring integrity to the department is a top priority, pointing to Attorney General Ed Levi, who headed the department through its post-Watergate reforms, as his model for leading DOJ.

"I want to make clear to the career prosecutors, the career lawyers, the career employees, the career agents at the department that my job is to protect them from partisan or other improper motives," Garland said.

"I would not have taken this job, if I thought politics would have any influence over prosecutions and investigations," Garland told Sen. John Cornyn, after the Texas Republican said Garland's commitment to an independent DOJ was his "sole criterion" for supporting his nomination.

The judge also made clear that if he were asked to do anything unethical and faced pressure to do so, it would cross a red line. Garland said Biden has "made it completely clear, publicly and in private, that he will not do that," and that if the scenario arose, he would tell the official in question that the request was unlawful.

"But of course, if I am asked to do something and an alternative is not accepted, I would resign," he said.

"I am not the president's lawyer. I am the United States' lawyer," Garland replied. "I will do everything in my power, which I believe is considerable, to fend off any effort by anyone to make prosecutions or investigations partisan or political in any way. My job is to protect the Department of Justice and its employees in going about their job and doing the right thing under the facts and the law."

https://www.law.com/nationallawjour...t-justice-department/?slreturn=20250106184312

As for concrete actions he took towards this end:

His first weeks in office were decidedly rocky with some of President Joe Biden’s supporters, who interpreted Garland’s reverence for the Justice Department’s institution as a sign that Garland wants to sweep aside alleged abuses of the Trump era.

Two decisions early in his tenure set the tone for critics: Garland continued the department’s Trump-era defense of the former President in a lawsuit brought by writer E. Jean Carroll, and the department sought to block release of an internal memo related to former Attorney General William Barr’s handling of special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/28/politics/garland-justice-department/index.html

 

[mkess101]

Yes and its widely thought that's why Garland was chosen.



https://www.law.com/nationallawjour...t-justice-department/?slreturn=20250106184312

As for concrete actions he took towards this end:


https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/28/politics/garland-justice-department/index.html

Wait. He's saying he was BEING fair, impartial, etc. You're insinuation takes it farther. That he actually went easy because of public perception. He said nothing to the effect of "going easy" on Trump to "appear unbiased" as you asserted earlier. Your claim was that he was affected by the politics of it. And your "evidence" is actions he took that are easily interpreted as simply upholding the law. So what basis other than a "gut feeling" do you have to assert that he was affected by the public perception and politics of the situation?

 

[Islam Imamate]

Wait. He's saying he was BEING fair, impartial, etc. You're insinuation takes it farther. That he actually went easy because of public perception. He said nothing to the effect of "going easy" on Trump to "appear unbiased" as you asserted earlier. Your claim was that he was affected by the politics of it. And your "evidence" is actions he took that are easily interpreted as simply upholding the law. So what basis other than a "gut feeling" do you have to assert that he was affected by the public perception and politics of the situation?

You asked me this

Did Garland say anything alluding to him having those specific motivations? That he wanted to give the appearance of fairness?

His statements there allude to his intention to restore faith in the DOJ by taking a non-partisan approach. That combined with how long it took him to appoint a special counsel to look into Trump's role in Jan 6th and some of his other actions like the blocking of the Barr memo are dots I'm connecting. You don't have to buy it but at least I can point to statements and actions of his that would suggest the political motivation. As you said earlier I can't read his mind but I can read his statements and observe his actions and if there's any political motivation here at all it was the motivation to restore trust in the DOJ even if it meant taking it easy on Trump.

 

[mkess101]

You asked me this

His statements there allude to his intention to restore faith in the DOJ by taking a non-partisan approach. That combined with how long it took him to appoint a special counsel to look into Trump's role in Jan 6th and some of his other actions like the blocking of the Barr memo are dots I'm connecting. You don't have to buy it but at least I can point to statements and actions of his that would suggest the political motivation. As you said earlier I can't read his mind but I can read his statements and observe his actions and if there's any political motivation here at all it was the motivation to restore trust in the DOJ even if it meant taking it easy on Trump.

Again: YOU have asserted in this thread that Garland "went easy" on Trump specifically due to public perception. Quoting him stating that he wants to restore faith in the DOJ speaks absolutely nothing of that. Do you have actual evidence that his intentions were to go easier on Trump (these are your assertions of him "going easy", I'm sure there are those who'd argue otherwise but that's mostly irrelevant to this part of the discussion) to achieve that end? Do you have anything other than a "gut feeling" that says he'd be willing to not just be fair and uphold the law--but to actually skew toward Trump to appear fair?

 

[PainIsLIfe]

I hope so so the democrats have another meltdown.

Then to top it off after 4 years if Vance doesn't win. Then he resigns after the election and Vance takes over and gives him a full pardon covering all the from birth to the Then.

I hope to see Vance win but that is a good fall back plan.

The TDS will run rampant fit the next 4 years and with any luck we can extent it for long into the future.

It's a state charge.