What do you bet that some fbi types snatched Mrs Trump’s underwear as souvenirs?

@ChandlerWay but it was such a small crime. Small crimes, if committed by potus, should be overlooked, right?

@ChandlerWay [quote]
This is a simple issue: do you believe in the rule of law or do you not?
[/quote]

Respectfully, that seems not just simple, but simplistic.

You can "believe" in the abstract about the rule of law, but still believe in exceptions to it's application.

What about Hillary's emails is one example, as is another post on SW today about a man hitting a woman supposedly "in self defense."

I'm no fan of Trump, or of the mental and moral contortions that his supporters may go through to justify their support, but as much as I want to see things as black and white sometimes, when I really look at it, I think the world is mostly shades of grey and we draw lines about which side things fall.

I'm not saying those lines shouldn't be drawn, but I do think they should be considered carefully.

@MistyCee I appreciate your thought, and I agree that our world has a lot of shades of grey. First of all, as a practicing lawyer, I can tell you that it's imperative that you look at each case individually. Hillary's emails have zero applicability - different law, different facts. The only issue is whether he broke the law or he didn't and it's clear he did. If Hillary broke some law then she should be prosecuted as well.

If you want to get in a broader discussion, the issue is whether we will have a functioning democracy or not. When a party creates politicians that are above the law then you slip into autocracy. I have spent years studying our system of laws and this is where we are headed under the current iteration of the republican party. I'm not saying this as an alarmist; the republican party states that they are against democracy every day. We have a pretty simple choice: either vote the current republicans out, or descend into a sham democracy.

@ChandlerWay The party encouraging millions to break our immigration laws and bailed out violent rioters nationwide is now preaching "the rule of law." 🤣 You can't make this stuff up.

@Carla Why not? Hillary destroyed 33,000 subpoeanaed emails and kept classified documents on a private server. No biggy, right?
[media=https://youtu.be/8Rx_8fY8TzY]

@graphite same thing as above. The only defense presented is "look at this other issue", whether that's Hillary's email or, I guess, rioting. If you don't understand the law, or are operating with the functional equivalent of a high school degree, you should probably not comment. If you have something constructive to say about why Trump did or did not break the specific laws cited then I'm all ears.

@ChandlerWay The big issue is the Democrats and their Stalinesque "You find the man, I'll find the 'crime'" investigations of Republicans, using the corrupt FBI and DoJ, while ignoring vast, vast Democrat mega-corruption. Understand now? Good.

@graphite Then don't commit a crime. This isn't difficult.

@ChandlerWay Or don't oppose the Democrat Party.

@graphite Dude, you can't read and you can't spell. Don't vote.

@ChandlerWay Lawyers are trained to think in ways that voters aren't, and, again, respectfully, distinguishing Hillary's emails as legally irrelevant doesn't really make a difference to folks who don't appreciate or even want to to appreciate the nuances.

That's the issue with Democracy, and claiming that Republicans are opposed to it. Are they really? Or are they opposed to an informed Democracy, as opposed to one they can manipulate?

I practice law as well, btw, and I totally get what you're saying, but I don't think what you just posted communicates well enough.

Not that I have anything better, obviously, but populism is kind of democracy, and, at the very least, we need to better define a "sham democracy."

@MistyCee I mean, as a start, alternate electors seems like a pretty clear indicator to me, but let me know what I'm missing.

@ChandlerWay Hell if I know [i]all[/i] that you're missing. I like the alternate electors idea, not that I can see how it'd get passed given where we are now politically.

My own two cents is, we need to fight through this CRT/political correctness crap somehow and start providing our voters with a decent background in history and civics if we want Democracy to work better and not to be a [i]tota[/i]l sham for manipulation.

We've literally got millions of Americans thinking that Nazis, Marxists, Socialists, Communists and liberals are equivalent at the moment, and, back to your original point, those same folks are skeptical about laws as being liberal constructs designed to oppress them from excercising their Second Amendment right to outshoot other citizens and get ahead in life.

Going back to your original point, though, I think we do no need to go back to law and order, but we also need to educate folks on why law and order is actually worthwhile.

@ChandlerWay You’re a practicing lawyer, so can you suggest or give a reason the lawyer there, representing Trump or his estate was denied going along with the agents as the search warrant was executed?

@soar2newhighs 🍿

@graphite They always seem to forget this. How convenient! It’s a simple “rule of law” that Hillary should be in jail for this. But, once again, she skated. Anyone who can’t see the obvious bias is biased.

@stratosranger [quote]
Anyone who can’t see the obvious bias is biased.
[/quote]

Lol.

@MistyCee Every case should be considered by itself. It's not a defense to say "but whatabout Hillary." If someone believes she should have been prosecuted, that's fine, but she wasn't even though Trump ran on "lock her up" and was in office for four years when he could have instructed the DOJ to go after her. It's water under the bridge. It's like everyone pulled over for speeding, telling the cop they shouldn't get a ticket because everyone else was also speeding.