3 Jun 2023 6:28 am
Part 2, continued:Cannonpointer » 03 Jun 2023, 1:16 am » wrote: ↑3. You assume anyone but you considers the topic worth arguing. I found it barely worth an ad hom and a dismissal. Do you think I care whether trump goes to jail? Indeed, I would celebrate the highly unlikely event, as it would signal a new low for a country that desperately needs to hit bottom.
But I didn't ask anyone on this forum if they 'cared'. I'm not that much interested in sentiment but of course it's okay to slip them in here and there. I'm glad you and I agree on that sentiment that you approve of Trump going to jail, however. I don't think it would be a low, I think it would be America coming to her senses and doing the right thing and having the courage to do it. It would tell the world that America is not going to let a criminal demagogue get away with it (evidence of criminality and demagoguery provided on request). I do believe that, if Trump is convicted to a jail sentence, we should honor the office that he represented and build him his own private wing at Rikers (or wherever), where his SS buddies who would hang out with him.
Moving on...
Your first point seems to accuse me of a double standard, but this is shifting the goalposts. We're discussing Trump's handling of classified documents here. If you'd like to have a separate discussion about Biden's actions, that's perfectly reasonable, but it doesn't negate the validity of this conversation. It's essential to note that holding all politicians accountable for their actions isn't a matter of bias or preference, but a principle of good governance.
Your second point suggests that I'm participating in a repeated pattern of crying wolf about Trump's actions. Again, this argument avoids addressing the topic directly and instead focuses on perceived patterns of behavior among those who critique Trump. Even if there were previous false alarms, that doesn't invalidate every subsequent concern.
As for your third point, the value or worthiness of a topic is subjective. What you might consider "barely worth an ad hom and a dismissal" may be of considerable interest or concern to others. We're all entitled to our opinions, but, as I stated above, I'm really not interested in sentiments, rants. While I understand your desire for debates on other pressing topics, this does not diminish the importance of accountability and the rule of law, which is the essence of this conversation. Your assertion that our opinions won't impact the outcome is indeed accurate, but that doesn't negate the value of public discourse. Discussing and critiquing the actions of our leaders is a vital part of a democratic society.
Is it not?
And so, I agree with you that a host of other significant issues deserves our attention, and I'd be more than willing to engage in a civil discussion on those topics in other threads (and I'm new here, you might want to link to threads you've started on other topics, the search function doesn't work so well for me for some reason on this particular forum). But for this discussion, I'd prefer if we could stick to the topic at hand and avoid personal accusations or dismissals. Let's focus on the potential legal implications of Trump's handling of classified documents and what that might mean for our country. If the topic is something you are bothered or are weary of, then I'm wondering why you chose to contribute to it?