Is it illegal to be unethical

[JoeMemphis]

Caught a recent poll that mumbled something about 50% of Americans think there will be a civil war within the next few years. i would have been in the undecided group.

The clown crew had the right idea when it comes to "couping" and seizing government buildings. What they missed was the part where you seize communications and at least have part of the armed forces on your side. Not that Trump didn't give it an effort.

[bold] Tradition. Faith. The peaceful transfer of power. It's not that i don't think the U.S. is resilient. It's that one of the main pillars of what makes a democracy work is being torn down. As witnessed by the recent rise in contested elections. That, to me, means we run a very good risk of losing it all.

I think we are as politically divided as I can recall. Divided to the point where the extremes in both parties hate the other. Not just disagree but hate. Most people in this country are caught in the middle of this dysfunction and just want government to work. Our enemies stand by and watch as we beat ourselves to death.

As I said, we need better leadership in both parties. I hope we get it but time will tell.

[Drak]

I'm betting that Joe hasn't watched any of the Jan 6th hearings. He's not interested in hearing anything that is in opposition to his beliefs. He's a purposeful low-information voter.

I bet Glenn hasn’t either. Neither one of them ever seems to know what’s going on.

[gounion]

I bet Glenn hasn’t either. Neither one of them ever seems to know what’s going on.

All Glenn does about the hearings is lie about them. He repeats all the Trump talking points.

[bird]

Bullshit it is 100pct partisan. Only allowing people who voted for impeachment.
Having two hand picked Republicans one not running for reelection one disgruntled does not make it bi partisan or mon partisan.
Does having Manchin oppose Biden's agenda make that bi partisan.
The tv show is highly edited
Does not allow cross examination
Does not allow an opposing view
Asking only questions which would never be allowed in court
One third California liberals
Only people who voted to impeach trump
Showing highly edited cutaways put together by a tv producer
I don't see how it could be anymore partisan.

Now people on the left are getting angry with the DOJ because they don't know what they are seeing on the tv show are facts to prove a forgone conclusion.
Not actual evidence or testimony which would be permissible in court.

If trump did anything that is an actual crime which can be proven in court our DOJ will act accordingly.
Now before my words get twisted.
Yes trump is corrupt
Yes trump is unethical
Yes trump did try and use intimidation
Yes trump is a bottom 5 president of all time

What we don't know is if he committed crimes which can be proven in court.
Not whether he committed or attempted to commit crimes.
It is highly likely he has been so corrupt for so long that he knows how to commit a crime in a manner in which he has deniability.

Haven’t read the entire thread but I will comment on one or two of your comments. This is a congressional committee, period. You don’t like it, too bad. There is no “opposing view”. The MAGAts invaded the capital building, period. The base premise that started the entire insurrection was false. It. Was. A. Lie. The election wasn’t stolen. Trump’s actions during his term were repellent enough to get more people out to vote against him. I recall hearing that some voters didn’t cast a vote for president while voting down ticket for Republicans rather than vote for Trump. That is their right. If the election was stolen then why s didn’t Dems win down ticket contests? Do you actually think they would rig the presidential election and ignore everything else?

Regarding the makeup of the committee, the House Republicans could have shown leadership in selecting people actually interested in getting to the bottom of what Trump did or didn’t do. They failed utterly. They showed their lack of moral as well as physical courage along with their obsequiousness to Trump instead. So, in your view, a shithead like Gym Jordan, who very well might have been involved, should have been on the committee?

Oh, and fuck your California liberals comment.

[carmenjonze]

The thread title, "Is it illegal to be unethical," is based in colonizer and slavedriver ethics.

Stealing land from the people who were already here was unethical, but it wasn't illegal, since they made it perfectly legal to do so. Glennfs is still in doubt whether forced assimilationism, population transfer, Indian Wars, etc., was even unethical.

Kidnapping, selling, buying, beating, mating, enslaving fellow human beings wasn't illegal, either, since they made it perfectly legal to do so. The "three hots and a cot"/"racial integrity" types of conservative whites would actually argue that slavery and segregation was some kind of public service on behalf of protecting and beneficently providing for the negroes.

The OP person trolling the board with this rhetorical question is already compromised, doesn't even know why, and is completely disconnected from the so-called ethics vs. the morality of what is and what is not legal.

[Drak]

The thread title, "Is it illegal to be unethical," is based in colonizer and slavedriver ethics.

Stealing land from the people who were already here was unethical, but it wasn't illegal, since they made it perfectly legal to do so. Glennfs is still in doubt whether forced assimilationism, population transfer, Indian Wars, etc., was even unethical.

Kidnapping, selling, buying, beating, mating, enslaving fellow human beings wasn't illegal, either, since they made it perfectly legal to do so. The "three hots and a cot"/"racial integrity" types of conservative whites would actually argue that slavery and segregation was some kind of public service on behalf of protecting and beneficently providing for the negroes.

The OP person trolling the board with this rhetorical question is already compromised, doesn't even know why, and is completely disconnected from the so-called ethics vs. the morality of what is and what is not legal.

The OP has a criminal mind, and has proven that over and over via his posts.

[carmenjonze]

The OP has a criminal mind, and has proven that over and over via his posts.

On the other hand, the OP votes for legislators of morality like Ralph Norman, LIndsey Graham, Nikki Haley, Tim Scott, and the rest of those violent people.

This is the epitome of conservative amorality. The only ethic is repressing everyone else. The only morality is violent authoritarianism.

[bradman]

What we don't know is if he committed crimes which can be proven in court.
Not whether he committed or attempted to commit crimes.
It is highly likely he has been so corrupt for so long that he knows how to commit a crime in a manner in which he has deniability.

[bold] Plausible deniability. You're always good for a chuckle.

Plausible deniability is the ability of people, typically senior officials in a formal or informal chain of command, to deny knowledge of or responsibility for any damnable actions committed by members of their organizational hierarchy. They may do so because of a lack or absence of evidence that can confirm their participation, even if they were personally involved in or at least willfully ignorant of the actions. If illegal or otherwise disreputable and unpopular activities become public, high-ranking officials may deny any awareness of such acts to insulate themselves and shift the blame onto the agents who carried out the acts, as they are confident that their doubters will be unable to prove otherwise. The lack of evidence to the contrary ostensibly makes the denial plausible (credible), but sometimes, it makes any accusations only unactionable.

The term typically implies forethought, such as intentionally setting up the conditions for the plausible avoidance of responsibility for one's future actions or knowledge. In some organizations, legal doctrines such as command responsibility exist to hold major parties responsible for the actions of subordinates who are involved in heinous acts and nullify any legal protection that their denial of involvement would carry.

In politics and espionage, deniability refers to the ability of a powerful player or intelligence agency to pass the buck and to avoid blowback by secretly arranging for an action to be taken on its behalf by a third party that is ostensibly unconnected with the major player. In political campaigns, plausible deniability enables candidates to stay clean and denounce third-party advertisements that use unethical approaches or potentially libelous innuendo.

[bold]Ya, so with no staff in sight, what was Trump's late night meeting with the kraken and and the ghoul? A garden club meeting?

[Libertas]

Was the SS complicit with trump and his followers like those here?


https://twitter.com/mattblaze/status/15 ... p3uBRFdvUw

One of the astounding things to come out of these hearings is the fact that the Secret Service and other law enforcement confirmed sightings of people with guns at the rally near the WH, and didn't immediately lock everything down.

[Glennfs]

The thread title, "Is it illegal to be unethical," is based in colonizer and slavedriver ethics.

Stealing land from the people who were already here was unethical, but it wasn't illegal, since they made it perfectly legal to do so. Glennfs is still in doubt whether forced assimilationism, population transfer, Indian Wars, etc., was even unethical.

Kidnapping, selling, buying, beating, mating, enslaving fellow human beings wasn't illegal, either, since they made it perfectly legal to do so. The "three hots and a cot"/"racial integrity" types of conservative whites would actually argue that slavery and segregation was some kind of public service on behalf of protecting and beneficently providing for the negroes.

The OP person trolling the board with this rhetorical question is already compromised, doesn't even know why, and is completely disconnected from the so-called ethics vs. the morality of what is and what is not legal.

https://effectiviology.com/ad-hominem-fallacy/

You are the best at this. Followed closely by drak

[carmenjonze]

https://effectiviology.com/ad-hominem-fallacy/

You are the best at this. Followed closely by drak

Oh my goodness, look who all of a sudden has discovered logical fallacies: the same guy who labels me racist, woke, comrade, SJW, and other euphemisms for nigger.

Look who also once again does not have a rational counterargument whenever your amoral ideology is criticized.

Lol how are you of all people going to run around here pretending to wonder about ethics?

This Trump sycophant is your rep, who you claim is doing so much for your district.

Propaganda about Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, which you've also repeated: Her Judicial Record - Norman.house.gov

Ralph Norman at the Heritage Foundation blog

Post & Courier, 2018:

“Did y’all hear this latest late-breaking news from the Kavanaugh hearings?” said Norman, R-Rock Hill, at a Kiwanis Club debate. “Ruth Bader Ginsburg came out that she was groped by Abraham Lincoln.”

Note the date: Thank You, President Trump - Norman.house.gov

Look at the trashy people you vote for and the destructive laws and policies you're in favor of. What in the world would you know about either ethics, or logical fallacies?

[bird]

https://effectiviology.com/ad-hominem-fallacy/

You are the best at this. Followed closely by drak

Go look up how Kevin McCarthy screwed up on the committee selection.

[bradman]

Go look up how Kevin McCarthy screwed up on the committee selection.

He doesn't care. He has no clue.

[Bludogdem]

After watching last night i'm hoping one point they brought up is pursued and driven home.

There's two things that make a democracy work and they both have to do with faith. You have to have faith that our dollar is worth a dollar when it never has been. The other, you have to have faith in the smooth, peaceful, transfer of power. Trump assaulted that faith, and perhaps, damaged our democracy beyond repair. That alone should prove him unfit for any kind of office.

I’d say what’s transpiring now is a testament to the strength and resiliency of our democracy.

[gounion]

I’d say what’s transpiring now is a testament to the strength and resiliency of our democracy.

I'd say it's a testament to the corruption and criminality of the conservative right.

And that's the lamest attempt yet I've ever heard defending the indefensible.

[Bludogdem]

I'd say it's a testament to the corruption and criminality of the conservative right.

And that's the lamest attempt yet I've ever heard defending the indefensible.

I’ve been watching the hearings. Reading a great deal on the subject. Looks like our democracy full bore. Takes time and patience. This is clearly a testament to to the strength, resiliency, and fundamentals of democracy to expose and deal with these issues.

[gounion]

I’ve been watching the hearings. Reading a great deal on the subject. Looks like our democracy full bore. Takes time and patience. This is clearly a testament to to the strength, resiliency, and fundamentals of democracy to expose and deal with these issues.

No. The side YOU support tried to overthrow our government by coup. Yet you still support them.

The GOP STILL supports Trump's coup attempt.

So quit defending them.

[carmenjonze]

I’d say what’s transpiring now is a testament to the strength and resiliency of our democracy.

Hi Dummkopf. The reason this is even happening is because you guys literally tried to undermine and overturn the results of a democratic election.

[Libertas]

the reason this is even happening is because you guys literally tried to undermine and overturn the results of a democratic election.

No good fucking cons, while THIS is happening

viewtopic.php?t=999

3 Counties in PA refuse to certify election

the fuckers sit here and tell us our democracy is strong

[carmenjonze]

No good fucking cons, while THIS

viewtopic.php?t=999



the fuckers sit here and tell us our democracy is strong

Give it time. These stupid little fascist foot soldiers around here will come to openly defend this, too.

[Libertas]

Give it time. These stupid little fascist foot soldiers around here will come to openly defend this, too.

EVERY red county where an election is lost by their party this will happen. THESE CONS will defend or be silent.

[carmenjonze]

EVERY red county where an election is lost by their party this will happen. THESE CONS will defend or be silent.

Thing is, the R party isn’t even hiding it. Fox News went full on white nationalist years ago, and so did the rest of their nooz outlets. Yet these blithering idiots around here have gaslight themselves into thinking nobody else can see it just because they have their hands over their eyes.

[Libertas]

Thing is, the R party isn’t even hiding it. Fox News went full on white nationalist years ago, and so did the rest of their nooz outlets. Yet these blithering idiots around here have gaslight themselves into thinking nobody else can see it just because they have their hands over their eyes.

The problem as I see it is the left plays by the rules, respects the law etc... they do not.

Garland wont do what he has to do. Biden wont go to the extremes he needs to go to. DeJoy still at USPS, I dont get it.

For instance all the polls show trump losing to any Democrat, and he would. But he doesn't need to win, he just needs to be the candidate, the red state maga fascists put in office by board cons, will do the rest.

Another for instance, Ginni Thomas subpoenaed to Jan 6 committee, she just wont show up.

[carmenjonze]

The problem as I see it is the left plays by the rules, respects the law etc... they do not.

Garland wont do what he has to do. Biden wont go to the extremes he needs to go to. DeJoy still at USPS, I dont get it.

For instance all the polls show trump losing to any Democrat, and he would. But he doesn't need to win, he just needs to be the candidate, the red state maga fascists put in office by board cons, will do the rest.

Another for instance, Ginni Thomas subpoenaed to Jan 6 committee, she just wont show up.

It's been helpful for me to think of it like this. These conservative whites really do believe that their race-totalitarianism, vote suppression, anti-LGBTQ & misogynist repression, and turning the screws on workers 1- causes no harm, 2- is good for everyone else, and 3- must be welcomed and gleefully followed by everyone in their path.

They're so sunken into their delusions of superiority, they're truly bewildered and hurt when their encroachments on everyone's everyday lives are rejected.

I don't often make this comparison, but it's a lot like "German hurt feelings" after WW1...oh my goodness, you guys didn't appreciate us invading Belgium in the chaos after Francis Fredinand was assassinated??? How could that be, we're God's Favorites!!

Same mentality...except present-day Germany deals with their colonizer/genodicer history a lot better than American conservative whites. Glad to protect myself from these destroyers. They get really mad when you protect yourselves from them.

[bradman]

I’d say what’s transpiring now is a testament to the strength and resiliency of our democracy.

i miss that kind of optimism.