3 ms·

Being guilty and having no reasonable out, while using the justic system procedures as a hail Mary so that you might escape on a technicality should be punished

Being guilty and having no reasonable out, while using the justic system procedures as a hail Mary so that you might escape on a technicality should be punished. If you have no remorse you are a clear danger to society.

thanksgiving 2y ago
> being guilty It is important to dispute this line of thinking because we are ALL guilty of many things through our lives. Our legal system is complicated and whether you think something is just or ethical has no bearing to whether it is legal. Also remember if I "lie" to a federal agent, I go to prison but when Michael Flynn does it... The whole crime is a disgrace. Why is lying to a federal agent a crime? If they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt what I said was a lie, why does it matter what I said? They already know the truth. If they don't independently know what I said was a lie, how can they prove I lied? And if this is somehow something I missed, why does the national security advisor get a pardon? If he gets a pardon, why don't everyone else convicted of the same charge also get a pardon? This is not justice.
- SoftTalker 2y ago
  If you rob a bank, but the money is recovered, should that be a crime?
- mandevil 2y ago
  So there are two different things here that you are conflating: the specific pardoning of Michael Flynn and whether lying to a federal agent should be a crime. Lying to a federal agent is a crime because the Government wants to make it easy to investigate crimes. Hence, lying to them being a crime. You are wasting the taxpayers money by mis-directing the investigators who represent us and are supposed to be investigating crime. That seems reasonable to me, though I did spend some time working as a contractor for the FBI, so I might have incorporated their views too much. Michael Flynn's case in particular was a travesty because of the pardon power, a weird old legacy of monarchy brought over into our system by people who didn't really think it through, like a lot of weird, arcane corners of the US government. Pardons in general I think we would be better off without. Either it is used for small-bore corruption of the justice system like this, or it is used for things that really ought to be moved through the traditional justice system (pardoning all of the Vietnam draft dodgers, pardoning Nixon, etc.).
- datavirtue 2y ago
  I wasn't mincing words. The statement is predicated on being guilty as charged. Not a difficult concept.
_DeadFred_ 2y ago
What a great mindset. People should be punished for exercising their rights based on an external interpretation of their motive. You realize you are saying rights should only exist after analyzing peoples' intention which is totally contrary to the Universalist definition of rights given by the constitution. To you rights are not something that all people should just intrinsically have. Just like the 'rights' granted by the Chinese constitution.

thanksgiving 2y ago

> being guilty It is important to dispute this line of thinking because we are ALL guilty of many things through our lives. Our legal system is complicated and whether you think something is just or ethical has no bearing to whether it is legal. Also remember if I "lie" to a federal agent, I go to prison but when Michael Flynn does it... The whole crime is a disgrace. Why is lying to a federal agent a crime? If they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt what I said was a lie, why does it matter what I said? They already know the truth. If they don't independently know what I said was a lie, how can they prove I lied? And if this is somehow something I missed, why does the national security advisor get a pardon? If he gets a pardon, why don't everyone else convicted of the same charge also get a pardon? This is not justice.

SoftTalker 2y ago
If you rob a bank, but the money is recovered, should that be a crime?
mandevil 2y ago
So there are two different things here that you are conflating: the specific pardoning of Michael Flynn and whether lying to a federal agent should be a crime. Lying to a federal agent is a crime because the Government wants to make it easy to investigate crimes. Hence, lying to them being a crime. You are wasting the taxpayers money by mis-directing the investigators who represent us and are supposed to be investigating crime. That seems reasonable to me, though I did spend some time working as a contractor for the FBI, so I might have incorporated their views too much. Michael Flynn's case in particular was a travesty because of the pardon power, a weird old legacy of monarchy brought over into our system by people who didn't really think it through, like a lot of weird, arcane corners of the US government. Pardons in general I think we would be better off without. Either it is used for small-bore corruption of the justice system like this, or it is used for things that really ought to be moved through the traditional justice system (pardoning all of the Vietnam draft dodgers, pardoning Nixon, etc.).
datavirtue 2y ago
I wasn't mincing words. The statement is predicated on being guilty as charged. Not a difficult concept.

_DeadFred_ 2y ago

What a great mindset. People should be punished for exercising their rights based on an external interpretation of their motive. You realize you are saying rights should only exist after analyzing peoples' intention which is totally contrary to the Universalist definition of rights given by the constitution. To you rights are not something that all people should just intrinsically have. Just like the 'rights' granted by the Chinese constitution.