4 ms·

Easy to say now, when you know it won't (can't) happen, and even if it did, it would have no effect on governing the nation. As defrost said well: "the questio

Easy to say now, when you know it won't (can't) happen, and even if it did, it would have no effect on governing the nation. As defrost said well: "the question of whether this was fair or unfair rests on whether other POTUS's have skated on criminal acts [for which they didn't have immunity as President]". Other POTUS's have, so, it was unfair. Changing that may be a good idea, or it may simply lead to more abuse of power as the party in office investigates its enemies. I guess we'll find out.

mcphage 2y ago
It's pretty easy to say, full stop.
- leereeves 2y ago
  Yet no Democrats said it when it was a real possibility, and would have mattered. Despite your erroneous thoughts, many Democrats complained.
  - whoknowsidont 2y ago
    You are literally holding the judicial process hostage and throwing proportionality out the window to make some contrived, disingenuous point. People are not willing to entertain this non-sense. He means it when any reasonable person would burn Bill Clinton just to avoid the catastrophe conservatives would bring upon this country by making the law useless. Trust it. And fix your perspectives. They're dangerous.
    - leereeves 2y ago
      > the catastrophe conservatives would bring upon this country by making the law useless. People with a different opinion winning would not end democracy. It would in fact be a triumph of democracy. On the other hand, trying to remove candidates from the ballot, or jail them before an election, is a real threat to democracy. Let the people decide in November.
      - whoknowsidont 2y ago
        >People with a different opinion winning would not end democracy That's their stated goal and motivation. It's not because it's different. It's what it is.
        leereeves 2y ago
        > That's their stated goal Show me the proof. Not some poorly reasoned allegation or out of context edited excerpt, but the original source where "they" say they intend to end democracy.
        whoknowsidont 2y ago
        >Not some poorly reasoned allegation or out of context edited excerpt I'm sorry I have to ask, do you guys think everyone else are just toddlers or that your uh... group of incredibly like minded individuals is really that clever? >does thing >claims to not do thing Oh well I guess that settles that! We were all worried for nothing.
        leereeves 2y ago
        I certainly don't think everyone else is a toddler, but I do wonder about some people. Anyway, this line of discussion is so far outside the HN guidelines (or the limits of "curious conversation"), I see little point in continuing. If you want to bandy insults in a forum that doesn't expect any sort of rational thought, may I suggest reddit? I think you'd like that site better. Edit in response to post below: Serious lack of self-awareness. Read your first message again and you'll see who made reasonable discussion impossible.
        whoknowsidont 2y ago
        You prevented any possible discussion of dissent or disagreement by ignoring readily available proof and stuffing it under what I'm going to politely refer to as rationalization. Don't you dare pretend like you're adhering to guidelines or standards of any sort, this forum or otherwise. The grandstanding is cute, but it's only fooling yourself.

mcphage 2y ago

It's pretty easy to say, full stop.

leereeves 2y ago
Yet no Democrats said it when it was a real possibility, and would have mattered. Despite your erroneous thoughts, many Democrats complained.
- whoknowsidont 2y ago
  You are literally holding the judicial process hostage and throwing proportionality out the window to make some contrived, disingenuous point. People are not willing to entertain this non-sense. He means it when any reasonable person would burn Bill Clinton just to avoid the catastrophe conservatives would bring upon this country by making the law useless. Trust it. And fix your perspectives. They're dangerous.
  - leereeves 2y ago
    > the catastrophe conservatives would bring upon this country by making the law useless. People with a different opinion winning would not end democracy. It would in fact be a triumph of democracy. On the other hand, trying to remove candidates from the ballot, or jail them before an election, is a real threat to democracy. Let the people decide in November.
    - whoknowsidont 2y ago
      >People with a different opinion winning would not end democracy That's their stated goal and motivation. It's not because it's different. It's what it is.
      - leereeves 2y ago
        > That's their stated goal Show me the proof. Not some poorly reasoned allegation or out of context edited excerpt, but the original source where "they" say they intend to end democracy.
        whoknowsidont 2y ago
        >Not some poorly reasoned allegation or out of context edited excerpt I'm sorry I have to ask, do you guys think everyone else are just toddlers or that your uh... group of incredibly like minded individuals is really that clever? >does thing >claims to not do thing Oh well I guess that settles that! We were all worried for nothing.
        leereeves 2y ago
        I certainly don't think everyone else is a toddler, but I do wonder about some people. Anyway, this line of discussion is so far outside the HN guidelines (or the limits of "curious conversation"), I see little point in continuing. If you want to bandy insults in a forum that doesn't expect any sort of rational thought, may I suggest reddit? I think you'd like that site better. Edit in response to post below: Serious lack of self-awareness. Read your first message again and you'll see who made reasonable discussion impossible.
        whoknowsidont 2y ago
        You prevented any possible discussion of dissent or disagreement by ignoring readily available proof and stuffing it under what I'm going to politely refer to as rationalization. Don't you dare pretend like you're adhering to guidelines or standards of any sort, this forum or otherwise. The grandstanding is cute, but it's only fooling yourself.