You should take a deep breath, calm down, and read what Cile wrote. They were pretty clear, but you keep yelling at them for things that they never said.
Lol! No one is yelling. My excitement level here is “mildly bored sarcasm”. Maybe you can point out where he was being pretty clear, and how I misunderstood what he was saying. Because even going back and reading it all again…it just sounds like he’s dodging his own statements after I respond to them, by claiming that I’m somehow “missing his point”.
Except his original point was pretty clear, as you said…and it was an objectively bad take. Here’s the quote that I took issue with…
The current process of Due Process is allowing blatantly illegal activities to continue unhindered because “we need to give them time to comply even when they are clearly not going to.” You need a different process, and pointing out that the system is not working is perfectly valid.
These are literally the same talking points that Trump is currently using to justify undermining people’s rights. Seriously, what did I miss? And what “different process” would work better than having to present evidence of guilt before you can convict someone of a crime?
(…all said very calmly, and patiently awaiting clarification, in case you still think I’m yelling…)
He is accurately pointing out that the current system isn’t working. He never said to get rid of the whole thing, you did. If you think he is “repeating Trump’s talking points” just because he said that the current system isn’t working, then you need to work on your reading comprehension skills.
Additionally, you don’t need to have a replacement or a fix, to be able to point out the flaws in the current system.
Trump is currently undermining the due process rights of thousands of people, using the reasoning that…
a)…some people don’t deserve those rights because they’re “bad people”…
…and b)…if we gave everyone the chance to dispute their case in court, it would take too long.
Buddy’s comment above may not be the exact same, word-for-word…but he’s still saying the exact same thing.
The problem with all these arguments is, who gets to decide who deserves the right to dispute theIR case in court, and who is pre-judged a criminal and gets sentenced without a trial? If it were up to Trump, all immigrants would have those rights taken away. If it was up to the guy above, Trump would. They’re making the same argument, just directing it towards different people. And if that is the system that you favor…then whether or not you have the legal right to defend yourself, will depend solely on who is accusing you of a crime.
That isn’t justice. That’s a dictatorship.
The flaws in the current system, exist because if they didn’t…innocent people would also be punished for crimes they didn’t commit. The entire reason the system can be “gamed”, is because closing those loopholes would turn the entire system into a draconian nightmare with no possible avenues of escape.
You should take a deep breath, calm down, and read what Cile wrote. They were pretty clear, but you keep yelling at them for things that they never said.
Lol! No one is yelling. My excitement level here is “mildly bored sarcasm”. Maybe you can point out where he was being pretty clear, and how I misunderstood what he was saying. Because even going back and reading it all again…it just sounds like he’s dodging his own statements after I respond to them, by claiming that I’m somehow “missing his point”.
Except his original point was pretty clear, as you said…and it was an objectively bad take. Here’s the quote that I took issue with…
These are literally the same talking points that Trump is currently using to justify undermining people’s rights. Seriously, what did I miss? And what “different process” would work better than having to present evidence of guilt before you can convict someone of a crime?
(…all said very calmly, and patiently awaiting clarification, in case you still think I’m yelling…)
He is accurately pointing out that the current system isn’t working. He never said to get rid of the whole thing, you did. If you think he is “repeating Trump’s talking points” just because he said that the current system isn’t working, then you need to work on your reading comprehension skills.
Additionally, you don’t need to have a replacement or a fix, to be able to point out the flaws in the current system.
Man, you guys have really got to start paying attention…
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-trial-migrants-deport/story?id=121080810
Trump is currently undermining the due process rights of thousands of people, using the reasoning that…
a)…some people don’t deserve those rights because they’re “bad people”…
…and b)…if we gave everyone the chance to dispute their case in court, it would take too long.
Buddy’s comment above may not be the exact same, word-for-word…but he’s still saying the exact same thing.
The problem with all these arguments is, who gets to decide who deserves the right to dispute theIR case in court, and who is pre-judged a criminal and gets sentenced without a trial? If it were up to Trump, all immigrants would have those rights taken away. If it was up to the guy above, Trump would. They’re making the same argument, just directing it towards different people. And if that is the system that you favor…then whether or not you have the legal right to defend yourself, will depend solely on who is accusing you of a crime.
That isn’t justice. That’s a dictatorship.
The flaws in the current system, exist because if they didn’t…innocent people would also be punished for crimes they didn’t commit. The entire reason the system can be “gamed”, is because closing those loopholes would turn the entire system into a draconian nightmare with no possible avenues of escape.