Honorentheos and Barr

[_moksha]

I can't remember all of your defense of Attorney General William Barr. Can you remind me again why this criminal Attorney General should not be investigated for his role in subverting justice?

[_canpakes]

I can't remember all of your defense of Attorney General William Barr. Can you remind me again why this criminal Attorney General should not be investigated for his role in subverting justice?

Well, for starters, he looks like Grumpy Cat. And he gives Trump lots of compliments, and he subverts the law. All of these things nullify the need for Republicans to investigate any of his actions.

[_honorentheos]

Probably don't remember because what you said was he should be in jail, not investigated. You know, lock him up? It's a catchy thing thugs say at thug get togethers.

[_EAllusion]

Probably don't remember because what you said was he should be in jail, not investigated. You know, lock him up? It's a catchy thing thugs say at thug get togethers.

I don't think that is an accurate summary of what was being argued there. It was implied that Barr should be investigated and his behavior considered via a fair process, but also that because evidence of wrongdoing was apparent, this should naturally result in him going to jail ASAP. It's like saying, "OJ should be in prison." The person saying that isn't saying he should be kept under lock and key by a lynch mob. They mean that OJ should be subject to the judicial system and because his guilt is manifestly obvious on the publicly available information, a fair result would then result in prison time.

[Guest]

Probably don't remember because what you said was he should be in jail, not investigated. You know, lock him up? It's a catchy thing thugs say at thug get togethers.

I don't think that is an accurate summary of what was being argued there.

viewtopic.php?p=1197585#p1197585

Yeah it was.

[_EAllusion]

http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=1197585#p1197585

Yeah it was.

All that link shows is you are continuing your misunderstandings from then into the present.

[_honorentheos]

http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=1197585#p1197585

Yeah it was.

All that link shows is you are continuing your misunderstandings from then into the present.

Moksha was not making the argument you say he was. But, play that theater thing you do where you play all the parts for us from the movie running in your own head. It's entertaining.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I can't remember all of your defense of Attorney General William Barr. Can you remind me again why this criminal Attorney General should not be investigated for his role in subverting justice?

Who, uh, would investigate, prosecute, and then sentence him?

- Doc

[_EAllusion]

Another, perhaps more obvious example, would be someone saying that Trump should be impeached and removed from office. Of course he should. Then you chime in and go, "Whoa now. This isn't a mobocracy. He deserves investigation and trial." The person isn't saying that Trump shouldn't be afforded due process. The person is saying the evidence is so blatant than due process, done properly, will yield that result.

When Moksha wrote that post, Barr was in open violation of the law. No investigation was needed to know that was the case. This doesn't mean that Barr should not be subject to a just process, but rather that no further investigation in needed to know certain things about his violation of the law and what that means for what should happen to him.

[_honorentheos]

One of the terrible effects of Trump on our nation is that he has normalized attitudes that are fundamentally anti-democratic. When I replied to moksha I disagreed with his OP, I specifically noted an investigation of Barr seemed warranted to which he replied as if I was defending Barr. As he did again in this OP. It was a reminder that he misremembered how it went.