Lol! Even Trump's pardons are less than worthless.

Kushner's friend Ken Kurson who installed spyware on his ex wife's computer to cyber stalk her and stole and used her passwords and harassed and threatened people including witnesses and court officials during their divorce was pardoned by Trump because spying on and stalking your ex and threatening the courts is something he's done and understands.

Too bad it's also a state crime in New York where he did it, and the supreme court already ruled that prosecuting in a different venue is not double jeopardy. They also ruled that accepting a pardon is legally admitting guilt. That means any crimes Trump pardoned (there's thousands) that are also state crimes can not only still be prosecuted, the defendants have already admitted guilt in a legally binding way.

D'oh! Say goodbye to the Trump crime syndicate.

Lol. Really? What did he let slip that pissed them off?

Don't forget, since he has federal immunity, he can no longer claim the 5th and can be forced to testify in federal court against his co conspirators....and not just these three.

Everyone who got blanket pardons can be forced to testify against Trump or be in contempt indefinitely. A pardon is both an admission of guilt and a federal immunity deal.

repubs kicked the mypillow moron out of their event after he was on bannons show.

Judge explicitly said Bannon was admitting his guilt. This means Manhattan DA and NY AG can go right after Bannon, and every state will jump into the class action against him. interesting being dropped today, just as the Manhattan DA is empaneling a grand jury for indictments. The "party of law and order" republicants LOL

thanks for reminding us bob we got another L lined up for ya

@bobknight33 you ignorant slut.

Dismissed only because Trump pardoned him.
"But the judge said the pardon was valid, and that even if Bannon did not formally admit guilt "the issuance of a pardon may carry an imputation of guilt; acceptance a confession of it.""

To be clear, taking the pardon is admitting guilt. He argued to be dismissed as a defendant because he had been granted and accepted the pardon. The judge agreed, the last hour pardon was valid, and is therefore a valid and legal admission by Bannon that he's guilty, and case dismissed....for him, the other three crooks don't have a get out of jail free card from Trump, so we still get to hear how his charity theft ring operated.

And another loss for Bobby. Even your big wins are actually huge losses.

Really?! Post the clip. I feel certain you're either talking about defense"experts" who made their biased and absolutely ridiculous determinations without seeing the body or doing a single test, or are misrepresenting the testimony. The paid defense "expert" witness testimony was less than worthless, it was an indicator of guilt to put that nonsense on as an "expert". Prove me wrong.

I like how she talks about TRYING to think about other people's feelings and thoughts, knowing that someone is trying to shame her into guilt--and she just...can't.

'What is empathy and maybe I don't have it"..

These folks make great lawyers.

Trump is, has, and will continue to betray you but you are blinded by guilt, anger and hate. You will welcome the punishment you believe you've earned for not seeing it coming. You are innocent and guilty at the same time. Luckily, that is what is known as growing pains. You can let it destroy you or make you a man. The choice is yours alone.

@newtboy,
Nazis and white power groups are bad enough that standing with them makes one my foe....like NAMBLA.

Do you apply that with equal opportunity?

The guilt of association for the gallery with Stevens and whatever his name was from Amerika.org, should be similar to association with say the Nation of Islam and Farakhan?

What about Canada’s branch of BLM in Toronto who blocked the Toronto Pride parade and one of whose founders(Yusra Khogali) have said things like “white people are recessive genetic defects, this is factual”

https://archive.is/7R2LV/c2fbdb212391ecd395c3c89372819e2bd8d772bc.png

And

“ Plz Allah give me strength to not cuss/kill these men and white folks out here today. Plz plz plz”

Thats as much ‘evidence’ as you’ve given for convicting Brett Stevens of white supremacy, and then to convict anyone associated with him there after.

I say we dont get so extreme as you and deny all those people and anyone associated a right to speak their piece on that basis alone. I say the stupid and wrong things being said need to be allowed to be spoken, and confront them with corrections and revelation rather than force and violence to quiet them.

Some was addressed.
Read the first link... https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ld50-gallery-protest-lucia-diego-donald-trump-alt-right-hackney-dalston-a7596346.html
Stevens wasn't the only one.

If they claim they have them speak there to " provide a vehicle for the free exploration of ideas, even and perhaps especially where these are challenging, controversial or indeed distasteful for some individuals to contemplate." but hold the events in secret, only open to far right wingers and Nazis, that's pretty blatantly a lie. Don't you agree?

When they gave private information about the artists who outed their secret agenda to Amerika they became unambiguously guilty by their own actions, not just association....and guilt by association is still guilt. If I stand with, support, defend, and host NAMBLA, I fully expect to be lumped with them. They NEVER denounced the hate, racism, or fascism they supported, and they participated with them in attacks against those who oppose Nazis. Ergo-Nazi.

@newtboy,

EDIT: drafted this and sent while you were writing previous reply, so maybe some of this is addressed?

Alright, I've gone one step further and read through the shutdownld50 tumblr 'evidence' seeing as they of all places probably gather the most condemning evidence they could.

The evidence amounts to putting on 1 event/exhibit that included far right folks, and included "Brett Stevens", whom I'm not familiar with but the quote from him on Breivik certainly sounds bad. In addition to putting on this exhibit, the even worse accusation is that they didn't really advertise it much publicly. Now, call me skeptical, but I have to believe that if they HAD advertised it heavily that ALSO would have compounded their guilt.

To me it still looks like guilt be association. The gallery had the audacity to host speakers that people disliked, so ergo-nazi!

Please though, if there is more or better evidence then please do let me know, or point me to what I'm missing. Is the Stevens guy so vehemently pro-nazi and and pro-violence that the association really should be enough? I'm inclined to believe no else they'd have better and more extensive quotes to use against him.

Again, I'm coming from a place of not knowing any of these people's backgrounds or history, but if we are supposed to believe them to be villians of such a high degree, I want a stronger case than those people say so and if you spent a few weeks of research on it you'd agree, trust us.

I find the argument that a good apple shouldn't even be in the policing business (i.e. guilt by association) problematic. My argument would be: If I'm a good apple, I'd be all for reforming and fumigating out all the bad apples! Bad apples don't deserve to tarnish my good reputation nor my silence (i.e. as good as complicity), ESPECIALLY since there are -- ahem -- "only 0.01%" of them in the force! Isn't that the logical and moral sentiment?

My concern about focusing the debate on the ratio of "Good apples vs. bad apples" is that it's fraught with pitfalls. Without "big data" (because the System won't ever allows such transparency), that "ratio" is subjective. It's just an excuse for politicians and legislators to wiggle out doing anything.

The argument should be that a fair, just and functioning society should punish each and every bad apples to protect the good apples and its citizens. We shouldn't tolerate any bad apples, no matter the "ratio"... police depts & judges SHOULD be exemplary in their knowledge and adherent to the law, NOT the other way around. How else should a people trust its government?

Besides, if what they say is true -- that the "bad apples are few and far between" -- there shouldn't be much consequence to prosecute them all right? It must be worth reforming to salvage the far-to-damaged reputation right? It would be a moral booster for BOTH the police & community IMO.

Thank you....accepted.

The "no good cop" part is right...it's not guilt by association though, it's guilt by being complicit, not turning them in, turning a blind eye, lying to protect the "bad apples"...being accessories after the fact is criminal. Yes, failure to clean their own house makes them bad cops. That's fixable, but only if they clean house...the best, easiest, most thorough way would be fire them all and only reinstate those with clean records, those with complaints need retraining at the least before being police again, many need to be fired. Not perfect, but better than most suggestions imo.
Edit: I do like the suggestion to make it the law that they must intervene if another cop is out of control, and must report it. I also support body cams that can't be turned off, but I want covering them or taking them off to be a felony.

I did say fire them all....but also said to hire them back. That gives us an opportunity to say 'this guy has 27 complaints and 3 multi-million dollar settlements paid out, he's not cop material'. Union rules won't let cops be fired even for cause most times, and absolutely won't allow a national registry of criminal cops. Those facts need to change if the culture is to change.

I agree, there are those few out there advocating no police....I'm just not one of them.

I'm of the opinion that if we keep any of the bad apples, nothing else matters, they'll corrupt the rest. The best way to save the bunch is remove any apples that even LOOK bad....that may leave us with a massive shortage, but that's FAR better than the criminal force we have today, no? One bad apple spoils the bunch...I wish those crying about a just few bad apples understood the phrase they're parsing.

Nothing will satisfy EVERYONE, but it actually takes very little to placate most mobs, just the suggestion that they've been heard is often enough, and why things got so bad. Too often "we hear you" is the only reform, and even that is forgotten as soon as the streets are cleared. I hope this time is different, but I'm not holding my breath.

Apologies, didn't mean to misrepresent you. We've debated things before and you seemed to lean to no cop is a good cop because there are so many bad ones guilt be association and failure to clean things up makes them all bad. You'd also said up thread to fire all active officers.

I'll cease trying to word how you feel on it, I just wanted to demonstrate by counter example that not everybody means 'reform' when they say "defund". At a minimum , the degree of 'reform' varies from change some laws and regulations to fire them and start over from scratch.

My comment of being ruled by our 'betters' was meant as a sarcastic dig on them and their abject failure in letting things rot this far and doing nothing.

Finally, my comment on public opinion on solutions being non-uniform was mostly to emphasize that as just normal, and the current status quo is just so unacceptable that it is unifying people from varied points of view to stand up against it. The most important point being that declaring, see nothing will satisfy the mob because they can't agree what to do is a twisted deception and the truth is people want things to be better than they are, and there is as you pointed out tonnes of common sense ways to go about that,

O'Fortuna was the icing on the cake! The Cake of Guilt-Inducing Hysterical Laughter.

You are both saying the same thing.

The only difference is that the cynicism isn't consistently applied to everyone who warrants it.

(I heavily suspect that when the money doesn't add up - someone is making money on the side. And it just so happens that they are in the position to sell regulatory capture, so it is the most likely candidate.)




In this case AOC is on point (granted that Trump is wealthy prior to office).

If I were to criticize her, it would not be for this stuff.
(It would be for identitarianism [vs individualism])



The guilt so far is the sort of guilt everyone has. Not saying everything is kosher - just saying that everyone is guilty, malfeasance or not.

There is a saying, show me the man, I'll show you the crime.

I'm sure that the FBI can look closely enough to everyone related to trump and find something to convict everyone of. It may not be foreign influence related, but it will be something. They can even drag things out until the prez is out of office before going after the juicy targets.

-scheherazade