Leftists Want To Ban Speech...

[Cow Poke]

You mean the ones here talking about Hillary?

Them, too. Though there's far more evidence for Hillary needing to be in jail than there is for some of the others who haven't even had a hearing.

Comey pretty much laid the groundwork that would have hands-down indicted Hillary, then pulled it back.

[carpedm9587]

It is no more proper for Trump to call for the incarceration of individuals not having received due process than it was for Obama to weigh in on matters of law enforcement not yet resolved.

Why is it, I wonder, that almost any criticism of Trump results in a knee-jerk, "what about Obama?" response?

That kind of crap should be left to people like the internet trolls on Tweb who declare "they should be in jail right now", without the "they" having even been indicted.

Calling Mr. Trump a troll is more than justified. IMO, the same cannot be said about Mr. Obama.

On the issue of government officials speaking "as a private citizen" while in government office -- I think the classier ones generally don't.

Agreed.

[carpedm9587]

Them, too. Though there's far more evidence for Hillary needing to be in jail than there is for some of the others who haven't even had a hearing.

Comey pretty much laid the groundwork that would have hands-down indicted Hillary, then pulled it back.

So our legal system has not indicted, she has not been convicted, and that remains true despite 1.5+ years of a new, opposing administration.

I think it's about time to stop beating the long-dead Hillary horse.

[Cow Poke]

So our legal system has not indicted, she has not been convicted, and that remains true despite 1.5+ years of a new, opposing administration.

I think it's about time to stop beating the long-dead Hillary horse.

There is, however, in this case, an apparent miscarriage of justice. Comey laid out a very clear case for indictment. Lawyers on both sides expressed surprise that he laid out a clear case, then choked. And this was after an investigation.

[carpedm9587]

There is, however, in this case, an apparent miscarriage of justice. Comey laid out a very clear case for indictment. Lawyers on both sides expressed surprise that he laid out a clear case, then choked. And this was after an investigation.

And Comey is out...has been for some time...and still no indictment. The entire executive branch, headed by Trump, is about the enforcement of law...and still no indictment. Mr. Sessions is a Republican...and the attorney general... and still no indictment.

So....

[Cow Poke]

Why is it, I wonder, that almost any criticism of Trump results in a knee-jerk, "what about Obama?" response?

Because of the obvious hypocrisy of the left in not having called out Obama for the very same things.

Calling Mr. Trump a troll is more than justified. IMO, the same cannot be said about Mr. Obama.

Mr. Obama was much more dignified in his crappedness, agreed.

Agreed.

That worries me!

[Cow Poke]

And Comey is out...has been for some time...and still no indictment.

An alleged miscarriage of justice would not be remedied by Comey staying longer in office.

The entire executive branch, headed by Trump, is about the enforcement of law...and still no indictment. Mr. Sessions is a Republican...and the attorney general... and still no indictment.

So....

And if there WERE an indictment of Hillary at this point, under "The entire executive branch, headed by Trump", there would be screams of obstruction of justice / meddling / interference, etc....

There is ongoing investigation of the 'people behind the scenes' at the FBI, and the probability that Comey actually changed 'legal terms' in his briefing that indicated a lesser charge. Also, it is highly unusual for an FBI director to continue to conclude with his goofy "no reasonable prosecutor" statement. That was none of his business.

[carpedm9587]

Because of the obvious hypocrisy of the left in not having called out Obama for the very same things.

Sorry, CP, but there is just no comparison. Obama may have said something here and there (and I frankly don't even know of a place where that happened, so I'm not sure what you're referring to). Trump, on the other hand, has been a hammer on this theme from the outset - constantly making comments on guilt (and so forth) before the legal system has had a chance to act.

Mr. Obama was much more dignified in his crappedness, agreed.

No person is perfect, but I found Mr. Obama to generally be a man of decent ethics. Although I did not agree with all of his policies, it never crossed my mind to question his general integrity or good intent. I had a bit more of a question about Mr. Bush. Mr. Clinton was a moral scumbag (IMO) in many ways. Mr. Trump sits at the bottom of the presidential barrel, lacking in even the most basic of decent characteristics. He's a liar, a troll, an egomaniac, a vindictive person, and lacks pretty much any moral decency whatsoever.

That worries me!

It should.

[Cow Poke]

Sorry, CP, but there is just no comparison.

...as you get ready to compare....

Obama may have said something here and there (and I frankly don't even know of a place where that happened,

Of course not, because you LIKE him!

so I'm not sure what you're referring to).

Willful ignorance, my friend, willful ignorance.

Trump, on the other hand, has been a hammer on this theme from the outset - constantly making comments on guilt (and so forth) before the legal system has had a chance to act.

And I really wish he would just shut up.

No person is perfect, but I found Mr. Obama to generally be a man of decent ethics.

He was much better at faking sincerity.

Although I did not agree with all of his policies, it never crossed my mind to question his general integrity or good intent. I had a bit more of a question about Mr. Bush.

Both 'em?

Mr. Clinton was a moral scumbag (IMO) in many ways. Mr. Trump sits at the bottom of the presidential barrel, lacking in even the most basic of decent characteristics. He's a liar, a troll, an egomaniac, a vindictive person, and lacks pretty much any moral decency whatsoever.

That was quite some comparing for there being no comparison!

[carpedm9587]

An alleged miscarriage of justice would not be remedied by Comey staying longer in office.

I think you missed the point. Comey has been OUT of office for quite some time - and there is new leadership. That leadership was appointed by a Republic, approved by Republicans, and (unless I'm mistaken) IS Republican, with every reason in the world to want to pursue justice if illegalities can be shown to have happened. But nothing is happening...

Clinton continues to be tried and (professionally) executed in the court of public opinion, not in the halls of our legal system.

And if there WERE an indictment of Hillary at this point, under "The entire executive branch, headed by Trump", there would be screams of obstruction of justice / meddling / interference, etc....

Interesting. So you believe this administration (and justice department) decides which criminals to pursue based on the possible public backlash that would result? Not a very ethical way to run a justice department...

There is ongoing investigation of the 'people behind the scenes' at the FBI, and the probability that Comey actually changed 'legal terms' in his briefing that indicated a lesser charge. Also, it is highly unusual for an FBI director to continue to conclude with his goofy "no reasonable prosecutor" statement. That was none of his business.

...except that the AG at the time had already publicly said that she would depend on the recommendation of her FBI director. And we have the IG report from the CURRENT administration, which "found that political bias did not affect the investigation and it gave support to the decision not to prosecute Clinton."

The right needs to "move on." The horse is dead. Your own justice department has spoken. "We hate Clinton" worked in 2016. It's a tired old song in 2018 and certainly in 2020.

[Cow Poke]

I think you missed the point. Comey has been OUT of office for quite some time - and there is new leadership.

Didn't miss that at all, and already addressed, albeit it in a way you won't accept, so no need to waste more time on that.

[carpedm9587]

...as you get ready to compare....

Good point...

Of course not, because you LIKE him!

I do - but I do not make my assessment because I like him; I like him because of the assessment. To do otherwise would be intellectually dishonest.

Willful ignorance, my friend, willful ignorance.

No. I am simply not familiar with any place where Obama made the kinds of comments Trump has been making. So if you know of some - the evidence please...

And I really wish he would just shut up.

He was much better at faking sincerity.

That is not what I find when I review both what he himself has said, and what others have said about him.

Both 'em?

Actually - no. Sr. had my respect. Jr. lost a bit of it for two events. First, the "cowboy" approach to war. Shock and Awe? Mission Accomplished? Really? What are we - kids playing Risk? The second was when it became clear that a significant amount of deception was engaged in to justify entering into a war.

That was quite some comparing for there being no comparison!

So let me school you a tad,

The expression, "there's no comparison" is generally understood to mean, "they are very dissimilar." Comparing Obama's moral fiber and priorities to Trump's is roughly equivalent to comparing a neurosurgeon to a grave robber. Yeah, they both do something with bodies. And that's about where the similarity ends.

[Cow Poke]

The expression, "there's no comparison" is generally understood to mean, "they are very dissimilar."

Then say that!

[Sparko]

I bet you could go on facebook, youtube or twitter and find a ton of Nazi, ISIS, and Antifa videos and pages. So why Alex Jones?

I won't miss him, but he is already using this as a selling point to prove that there is a conspiracy against him.

[rogue06]

I bet you could go on facebook, youtube or twitter and find a ton of Nazi, ISIS, and Antifa videos and pages. So why Alex Jones?

I won't miss him, but he is already using this as a selling point to prove that there is a conspiracy against him.

Conservative commentator Candace Owens was banned by Twitter for re-tweeting some of the racist comments Sarah Jeong has posted in the past^[1] while Sarah Jeong was never banned for posting them in the first place. And do you think there is a chance in... well you know where, that someone like Louis Farrakhan has to worry about any of the social media giants banning and deleting his stuff no matter how loathsome some of the stuff he has said is?

What's "funny" is how some of the same folks who were wringing their hands just a few months ago about net neutrality allowing corporate entities to stifle speech are now cheering their decision to suppress Jones.




1. and was forced to apologize and reinstate her 12 hours later due to the backlash for doing so