You must log in or # to comment.
Where are the American people up to so far now in the “First They Came” sequence?
Those were the good 'ole days?
The country heals when this guy dies. I hope he gets an ending he truly deserves.
This guy?
Oh you misunderstand, he knows the law well. He just knows how to use it as a tool to protect the elites from accountability and as a bludgeon to punish the people for non-compliance, as well as how to make sure that never gets flipped.
Had someone unironically suggest that if Trump takes a third term that it would open the way for Obama to run again.
Anyone citing the old order of rules, laws, and fairness is delusional or under informed.
What he said has nothing to do with law. He just said stuff knowing that nobody will do anything to stop him. Or to stop them.
The law is extremely clear in this regard - the ICE dude murdered a person for no reason. The rules on the use of deadly force literally use a moving car as an example of when not to use deadly force - as long as there are “other defence options, such as moving out of the way”.
correct. this is a man that admitted openly to lying about immigrants eating pets to foment hatred to fire up his voter base that already hates immigrants.
The law is extremely clear in this regard - the ICE dude murdered a person for no reason. The rules on the use of deadly force literally use a moving car as an example of when not to use deadly force - as long as there are “other defence options, such as moving out of the way”.
When the people tasked with upholding the law consistently disregard it in particular circumstances - as they do when it comes to abuse of power by law enforcement - that law only exists in the circumstances in which it is consistently applied. Things like qualified immunity have effectively nullified any law that ostensibly holds law enforcement accountable. The law does not exist for any other purpose except to protect the dominant socioeconomic group in a given country without binding them, while binding the subjugated socioeconomic group without protecting them. Who is in which group is dynamic and always subject to change, but this rule almost always holds except in cases where very skilled lawyers are able to argue in court that someone in the latter group actually belongs to the former in some specific circumstance. That is the law being used for something that it was not designed to do, a bit like an exploit in a video game soon to be patched.
The law does not exist for any other purpose except to protect the dominant socioeconomic group in a given country
“In any given fundamentally broken country”, you mean?
The law absolutely does exist for other purposes. Otherwise we wouldn’t have as robust anti money laundering laws, child protection laws, rape laws, human rights laws, etc., etc.
All those laws are only enforced against disfavored groups.
Rich people got to engage in all the Epstein stuff and are all still free.
Elon can create an industrial child porn machine and all the governments are totally unbothered.
Enforcement of laws is a separate issue to the existence of laws.
Remember how Trump was talking about starting for a third term? Which is illegal in the US? Well, they intended to introduce legislation that would allow him to start legally. Problem is that if they did that, Obama could also start. Their solution? Add a clause that it had to be a third term within one term of the previous term, or something like that. Making it illegal for Obama to start but legal for Trump to start.
That’s a law that “exists for no other purpose except to protect/benefit the dominant socioeconomic group”.
A law saying “if you kill a dude for no reason, you’re going to jail” is not, even if oh so often certain class of mostly white guys are exempt from it.
All of those laws are unequally enforced. Anti money laundering laws are applied only to the subjugated socioeconomic group (drug dealers belonging to the working class, etc.). The dominant socioeconomic group gets their children protected, their rape victims to receive justice, their human rights defended. The subjugated socioeconomic group rarely benefits from these laws, which is why thousands of rape kits sit in warehouses never being investigated, why children born into poverty are more often separated from their parents and institutionalized rather than receiving the help they need, and why human rights are routinely violated without consequence.
The people making such laws can sometimes intend for them to be universal, but such people fundamentally misunderstand the nature of laws, and it never quite pans out that way in practice.
All of those laws are unequally enforced
There’s a massive gulf between “the purpose of a law existing” and “a law being enforced”.
Anti money laundering laws are applied only to the subjugated socioeconomic group (drug dealers belonging to the working class, etc.)
I know you don’t work in the field because you have no idea how absolutely, ridiculously hilarious this statement is. :D
Also, calling drug dealers “working class” is certainly a vibe…
The dominant socioeconomic group gets their children protected, their rape victims to receive justice, their human rights defended
Are you from the US?
The people making such laws can sometimes intend for them to be universal
The laws ARE universal. But because humans are humans (therefore: shitty), they’re not being universally or equally enforced.
And none of this changes the fact that laws do not, in fact, “exist for [no] other purpose except to protect the dominant socioeconomic group”.
“The purpose of a system is what it does.”
You are right. Laws are universal and apply equally to everyone. The problem is the systems that exist to create and apply those laws. There are far too many cases of the law being selective in who it protects and who it punishes for me to believe that it upholds fairness. I also don’t believe it’s a fundamental human failing, I think it’s functioning exactly as its corrupt creators intended.
There are far too many cases of the law being selective in who it protects and who it punishes
No. *There are too many cases where the interpretation of law is selective", and/or “there are too many cases where the enforcement of law is being selective”. There are no laws (that I know of, correct me if I’m wrong) that say “if you’re rich, this doesn’t apply to you”, or something like that.
I think it’s functioning exactly as its corrupt creators intended.
And this is where we disagree. Because, to me, thinking that every single lawmaker in the history of humanity (we have laws that date back thousands of years and are just copy-pasted between countries) was writing laws with malicious intent is some form of paranoidal insanity on par with “lizard people are controlling the government”.
Well, that is how the laws where designed.
This is such a childish thing to say, my god…
its
Thiel went to Stanford law ….I think a lot of these evil morons prove that these Ivy League schools are crap
They’re not “smarter”. They just are better connected.
The Ivy League is overrated, community college and khan academy are underrated
Those schools foster a certain way of thinking.
Seems like those schools were successful in teaching them how our legal system works and how to use it to advance their own goals. Seems like the only thing they didn’t learn is ethics, but their understanding of our legal system is pretty solid.
They’re literally out there committing crimes against international law and the constitution every day
And they’re getting away with it because they understand how the legal system works (or doesn’t).
They are getting away with it because they control the enforcement mechanisms. Captured by fascist’s to protect their orange king.
I agree, but also suspect that the legal system is not equally applied to everyone. Specially in totalitarian states like the US.
Only suspect?
Is the murderer absolutely immune from a person who wants to take revenge?
Yeah, ok, the murderer may never meet his legal and justified consequences but will the Nazi government of america always be there to protect him?Now, obviously, ;-);-) , I’m not saying a person should find this guy and do unto him what he has done unto others. Nope. No way…
This is a perspective that the leadership in general should keep in mind.
They are relishing in ignoring laws and treaties and just opting out of consequences. Generally people understand that honoring laws and elections leaves the populace broadly with a sense of justice even with misdeeds and the punishments are, generally, pretty light. Even the light punishments satisfy people.
Continually flaunting these mechanisms and denying people a civilized path to feelings of justice and being heard is a dangerous thing.
It’s why the control bounces back and forth between two sinilar political parties, most people get a sense of “my team won” or “my team will probably win next time” and this placates people. To decide to nope out of these conventions is to invite great risk.
On an unrelated note, for no reason at all
As expected. The Gestapo did exactly the same 90 years ago. Thanks to Trump evolution did not only stop: it went back 90 years. And the American people (just as the German) cannot do anything to stop him anymore. Sad times, sad times.
Trumps gonna want to give the murderer the congressional medal of honour
As president of congress he’ll get right on that
But the paid thug is operating under directive from really really wealthy people.
George W Bush went to Yale. That tells you everything you need to know about their standards.
We need some Nuremberg trials.
And rid the government of maga, a la denazification after ww2
I prefer the Italian method.
🤌
You’d want a stronger girder than they used.
He’s not wrong. There is absolute immunity for Trump friendly crimes, also known as presidential pardon.
Not absolute, state charges are not subject to federal pardons.
They don’t need to pardon him. Just put some more armed goons between him and whomever wants to serve justice. They’re already using military force against citizens.
Fuck you for reminding me how fragile our state really is.
That’s federal immunity. Doesn’t apply to state crimes.
State threw up their hands and gave up.
Source?
All I’ve seen is the feds keeping the state from being able to do anything.
State officials initially said they would investigate the killing. But Drew Evans, the superintendent of the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, said on Thursday that the agency had withdrawn because it had been denied access to evidence.
“The investigation would now be led solely by the FBI, and the BCA would no longer have access to the case materials, scene evidence or investigative interviews necessary to complete a thorough and independent investigation,” Evans wrote.
“Without complete access to the evidence, witnesses and information collected, we cannot meet the investigative standards that Minnesota law and the public demands. As a result, the BCA has reluctantly withdrawn from the investigation. The BCA Force Investigations Unit was designed to ensure consistency, accountability and public confidence, none of which can be achieved without full cooperation and jurisdictional clarity,” he wrote.
Pathetic.
jesus fuck im allowed to get the types of immunity wrong im a dipshit. this is just embarrassing im gonna go tease my ivy league educated sister
this was such an unhinged rant
The lawyers that Yale and Harvard have turned out, have become a scourge on our nation. Close down both of those Psychopath Factories.
