You are only browsing one thread in the discussion! All comments are available on the post page.

Return

Veraxus ,
@Veraxus@kbin.social avatar

Another day, another crime - another felony - brazenly committed by a Republican. And she'll probably get away with it, because laws and ethics are for plebes and "libs".

experbia ,
@experbia@kbin.social avatar

The justice system is reticent to dole out consequences to conservatives because they know that each time they do, there is a fair probability of an uptick in domestic terrorism. We literally let the terrorists win. If we apply the law equally to fascists as we do to the rest of us, they will kill people with no remorse.

Y'all Qaeda is intellectually incapable of differentiating between terrorism and normal protest. This is why they view "left wing" protests about systemic issues as city-razing terrorist attacks that need the military dispatched with blanket kill orders. This is why they don't equate their club shooting, truck crowd-plowing, armed home-invader, electrical substation gunner terrorist friends as being a problem - because theyre just "protesting" like the left. The left is "already doing it" so they can too.

The actual word "terrorist", to them, is a word that means one thing: a filthy middle easterner who wants to blow up buildings to go to a virgin-filled afterlife. There's absolutely no mental space for them to consider their fellow conservatives in the same group or to accept the actual definition.

This is so dangerous. We're already in a trap, even if we turn around now, it hurts a lot. The smart greedy opportunists flock loudly and publicly to conservatism now because they see that they can break the law and get away with it, because of this implied immunity-via-terrorism that may befall us if accountability comes for them in the public eye. But we need to turn around and pull out, because if we get fully trapped, we're all done for good.

wagesj45 ,
@wagesj45@kbin.social avatar

As shitty as it was, it is almost certainly explicitly constitutionally protected. She could be censured or expelled from congress, but it was not a crime by virtue of being done in her capacity as a representative.

Flag ,
@Flag@kbin.social avatar

Didnt she repeat the act afterwards tho? Outsode of the legal walls of congress?

wagesj45 ,
@wagesj45@kbin.social avatar

Now that I don't know. If so, then I suspect she'd no longer be covered, unless a court were to interpret speech pertaining to her role as congressperson anywhere to be the same as "in either house". I could see a good faith argument for it, but if Judge Wagesj45 was on the case, I don't think I'd rule in their favor.

instamat ,

She also sent out a link to the photos or a slideshow to her constituents via email.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • [email protected]
  • All magazines
    •