Who gives a shit? That's not even close to as egregious as the war crimes America has committed across the world for decades. Why haven't they tried Bush, Biden, HRC, and a ton of other congresspeople for butchering Iraq? Why haven't they tried Biden for Palestine?
It really shows that these liberals consider the victims of American imperialism to be subhuman. Their lives don't matter to Liberals.
Liberals when Presidents commit war crimes:
Liberals when a President tampers with an already illegitimate and undemocratic process to tip the odds of winning in his favor:
The courts you imagine to exist for trying these folks... Where can I find them?
I was answering why the words convicted felon in this case are being used.
To answer other questions about prosecution... The country decided that the president is immune from prosecution. Sadly I am not able to sway the court's decisions.
Where is the court to prosecute murders committed from thousands of miles away on other continents? Empowered by whom?
The courts you imagine to exist for trying these folks... Where can I find them?
The Hague. Granted, they won't put them on trial because the ICC exists to legitimize, not undermine, the western imperial project, but that's what they're supposed to be doing on paper.
As updated, your comment seems to be arguing that there is no way to deliver justice to some people regardless of how much they may deserve it, which leads to the conclusion that our justice system is arbitrary in whom it choose to punish. So, given that, why should we care if Trump is a felon?
I think that some crimes won't ever see justice. This world is not fair. Pretending it ever will be, or was, is a fairy tale.
I'm not trying to argue.
I'd say that there is such a thing as a jurisdiction.
Actions committed inside the range of a prosecutor's jurisdiction are eligible for prosecution by that party.
The argument is war crimes vs a felon.
Why should we care that Trump is a felon?
If it was for a series of DUIs, I'd say I wouldn't care.
The felonies are for election interference in a state that had jurisdiction. Election interference in a race for the same job he's shooting for again.
The felon is making promises to abuse the military industrial complex to a level that makes war crimes committed so far seem bashful.
If we were to compare the war crimes of the two candidates we still come up in favor of Biden.
I don't have the time to list the atrocities committed by our war machine(s).
Trump was arguably on the side of fascists and has come out in praise of dictators.
Trump has said that NATO would be dismantled under his care if they didn't pay up, like some sort of mob collection scheme.
Trump has said that Israel should step up their genocide.
Trump seriously mismanaged every military operation that he was involved in. For example: destroying lives and completely upending free and fair rule of law in Afghanistan bungling a withdrawal that left the Islamic religious terrorists in control
There isn't a court to prosecute our president(s) for any defensive or offensive actions taken. There absolutely should be. Good luck getting any non-compliant nuclear powers to submit.
This world is not fair. Pretending it ever will be, or was, is a fairy tale.
Nobody here is doing that.
I'm not trying to argue.
Then what are you doing?
I'd say that there is such a thing as a jurisdiction. Actions committed inside the range of a prosecutor's jurisdiction are eligible for prosecution by that party.
Stating the obvious.
The felonies are for election interference in a state that had jurisdiction. Election interference in a race for the same job he's shooting for again.
Election interference by improperly disclosing paying hush money to a porn star about an affair that none of his supporters cared about once the news broke. Not even that he paid the money, that he didn't fill out the correct forms. Out of all the things he did, this is what the legal system felt it could prosecute him for. Does that not bother you?
The felon is making promises to abuse the military industrial complex to a level that makes war crimes committed so far seem bashful.
We know he's awful - the argument is why some folks are talking way more about the felony convictions than the war crimes.
Trump was arguably on the side of fascists and has come out in praise of dictators.
And yet he wasn't punished for that, it was for the porn start hush money. Really makes you think.
Trump has said that NATO would be dismantled under his care
Would have been a good thing.
like some sort of mob collection scheme.
Wait 'till you see NATO.
Trump has said that Israel should step up their genocide.
Again, not something he'd be punished for if he did. Ex 1: Joe Biden, currently aiding Israel in stepping up their genocide.
For example: destroying lives and completely upending free and fair rule of law in Afghanistan bungling a withdrawal that left the Islamic religious terrorists in control
The withdrawal was negotiated under Trump but executed under Biden so I don't know if you can blame him for bungling the withdrawal. Also, lmao to the idea that Afghanistan was under free and fair rule prior to the withdrawal. That which left the Islamic religious terrorists in control was, in fact, the 21-year-long bungled invasion, which you can't really hang on Trump. Again, not something he'd ever be prosecuted for anyway.
There isn't a court to prosecute our president(s) for any defensive or offensive actions taken. There absolutely should be. Good luck getting any non-compliant nuclear powers to submit.
We've (USA) been in a republic since independence. Democracy only for local elections, and then electing representatives.
The country has its downfalls. We could use an update to our voting system to represent the people more to boot.
That's where the comparison between a felon and a non-felon become salient. The one with felonies actively tried to corrupt the voting system more than once. If the people are expected to buy into the system at all they need to be able to have free, and transparent elections.
The courts also decided that corporations are people, and they can contribute to campaigns like people.
The courts also decided that political action committees could take massive amounts of cash and spend it as they want with very little oversight.
The system needs to get its stuff together, its true purpose of serving the aristocracy is showing too much.
The people won't challenge the status quo, the majority with their bread and circuses.
Speaking of 'democracy' or other types of government.
Democracy can be perverted quickly, the majority eating all minorities rapidly.
Democratic republics seem to have corporations entrenched in them currently, serving the corporation not the person.
Been called a corporatocracy i believe.
Communism hasn't survived without being corrupted to date.
There should be a solution that actually works, any ideas?
Better things are possible, people need to change how they're approaching the situation(s). We need to stop genocide everywhere and work together.
People who change their mind can be better.
The courts you imagine to exist for trying these folks... Where can I find them?
Take your pick. There's the Hague, which is internationally recognized as a place to try war criminals. Or there could be a tribunal in Nuremberg since that's where they hanged (a woefully paltry number of) high-ranking Nazis after WWII. Or those war criminals could be handed over to People's Courts comprised of the families that survived having their loved ones murdered. Send Bush to Iraq, send Biden to Palestine, send Clinton to Libya.
The country decided that the president is immune from prosecution.
A system which enshrines in its legal structures such morally reprehensible positions is completely illegitimate. We don't have to obey, nor should we.
As for your last question, consider it a wish-list. But if anyone in government actually had a conscience they would be demanding this too or seeking to change the laws to get the ball rolling. Gotta prosecute and punish the war criminals before they die of old age and escape to a Hell that will be far kinder on them than they deserve.
The list of folks guilty of war crimes is myriad and not limited to the presidents.
Not trying to nitpick, but.... Agree Bush should be dragged along with Saudi Arabian parties responsible through Iraq & Afghanistan.
Our 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, etc Oil controlling regime swapping political systems are responsible for so much turmoil in Libya, Afghanistan, and other parts of the middle east - it's reductive to try and blame a single president or country for this insanity.
I don't believe you could or should blame Biden singlehandedly for Palestine.
I feel like they have all of the Zionists, British imperialists, and American imperialists and political parties to blame for the last 75+ years to blame in that.
I like the idea of acknowledging this is a wish list.
I don't believe there to be anywhere that will punish or reward them. I feel like that's another fairy tale.
The list of folks guilty of war crimes is myriad and not limited to the presidents.
Yes.
I don't believe you could or should blame Biden singlehandedly for Palestine.
Yes.
Neither of those lessen the guilt that the Presidents bear, they simply expand the roster of people to try for abetting war crimes. When it comes to punishment, it's fine to start at the top and work down the hierarchies until someone feels like it's getting to be too much. Part of the point is revenge. Part of the point is to set an example. Clearly the Nuremberg trials didn't go far enough because the "Allies" didn't learn from it.
I like the idea of acknowledging this is a wish list. I don't believe there to be anywhere that will punish or reward them. I feel like that's another fairy tale.
I argue for what's moral whether or not anyone else will listen. The realization that nobody who can try these war criminals will try them is another way to help people learn that we live in a fundamentally evil system that must be destroyed.
Yes the 'paragon of justice' known as Iran. I'm sure they've not committed any war crimes in the last 50 years. I'm sure a current felon didn't mess up a deal with them.
Since the USA messed up their government, they have checks notes laws based on a guy who history records as having married a 9 year old in his adult life. A religion as flawed as every other, and also as worthless.
Who gives a shit? That's not even close to as egregious as the war crimes America has committed across the world for decades. Why haven't they tried Bush, Biden, HRC, and a ton of other congresspeople for butchering Iraq? Why haven't they tried Biden for Palestine?
It really shows that these liberals consider the victims of American imperialism to be subhuman. Their lives don't matter to Liberals.
Liberals when Presidents commit war crimes:
Liberals when a President tampers with an already illegitimate and undemocratic process to tip the odds of winning in his favor:
The courts you imagine to exist for trying these folks... Where can I find them?
I was answering why the words convicted felon in this case are being used.
To answer other questions about prosecution... The country decided that the president is immune from prosecution. Sadly I am not able to sway the court's decisions.
Where is the court to prosecute murders committed from thousands of miles away on other continents? Empowered by whom?
The Hague. Granted, they won't put them on trial because the ICC exists to legitimize, not undermine, the western imperial project, but that's what they're supposed to be doing on paper.
Sorry updated before I saw the reply.
As updated, your comment seems to be arguing that there is no way to deliver justice to some people regardless of how much they may deserve it, which leads to the conclusion that our justice system is arbitrary in whom it choose to punish. So, given that, why should we care if Trump is a felon?
I think that some crimes won't ever see justice. This world is not fair. Pretending it ever will be, or was, is a fairy tale.
I'm not trying to argue.
I'd say that there is such a thing as a jurisdiction.
Actions committed inside the range of a prosecutor's jurisdiction are eligible for prosecution by that party.
The argument is war crimes vs a felon.
Why should we care that Trump is a felon? If it was for a series of DUIs, I'd say I wouldn't care.
The felonies are for election interference in a state that had jurisdiction. Election interference in a race for the same job he's shooting for again.
The felon is making promises to abuse the military industrial complex to a level that makes war crimes committed so far seem bashful.
If we were to compare the war crimes of the two candidates we still come up in favor of Biden. I don't have the time to list the atrocities committed by our war machine(s).
Trump was arguably on the side of fascists and has come out in praise of dictators. Trump has said that NATO would be dismantled under his care if they didn't pay up, like some sort of mob collection scheme. Trump has said that Israel should step up their genocide. Trump seriously mismanaged every military operation that he was involved in. For example: destroying lives and completely upending free and fair rule of law in Afghanistan bungling a withdrawal that left the Islamic religious terrorists in control
There isn't a court to prosecute our president(s) for any defensive or offensive actions taken. There absolutely should be. Good luck getting any non-compliant nuclear powers to submit.
Nobody here is doing that.
Then what are you doing?
Stating the obvious.
Election interference by improperly disclosing paying hush money to a porn star about an affair that none of his supporters cared about once the news broke. Not even that he paid the money, that he didn't fill out the correct forms. Out of all the things he did, this is what the legal system felt it could prosecute him for. Does that not bother you?
We know he's awful - the argument is why some folks are talking way more about the felony convictions than the war crimes.
And yet he wasn't punished for that, it was for the porn start hush money. Really makes you think.
Would have been a good thing.
Wait 'till you see NATO.
Again, not something he'd be punished for if he did. Ex 1: Joe Biden, currently aiding Israel in stepping up their genocide.
The withdrawal was negotiated under Trump but executed under Biden so I don't know if you can blame him for bungling the withdrawal. Also, lmao to the idea that Afghanistan was under free and fair rule prior to the withdrawal. That which left the Islamic religious terrorists in control was, in fact, the 21-year-long bungled invasion, which you can't really hang on Trump. Again, not something he'd ever be prosecuted for anyway.
What Egon said.
deleted by creator
Democracy
We've (USA) been in a republic since independence. Democracy only for local elections, and then electing representatives. The country has its downfalls. We could use an update to our voting system to represent the people more to boot.
That's where the comparison between a felon and a non-felon become salient. The one with felonies actively tried to corrupt the voting system more than once. If the people are expected to buy into the system at all they need to be able to have free, and transparent elections.
The courts also decided that corporations are people, and they can contribute to campaigns like people. The courts also decided that political action committees could take massive amounts of cash and spend it as they want with very little oversight.
The system needs to get its stuff together, its true purpose of serving the aristocracy is showing too much.
The people won't challenge the status quo, the majority with their bread and circuses.
Speaking of 'democracy' or other types of government. Democracy can be perverted quickly, the majority eating all minorities rapidly. Democratic republics seem to have corporations entrenched in them currently, serving the corporation not the person. Been called a corporatocracy i believe. Communism hasn't survived without being corrupted to date.
There should be a solution that actually works, any ideas?
You spent so many posts and so many words when all you really said was "better things aren't possible".
You spent one word describing a situation. You were wrong.
Better things are possible, people need to change how they're approaching the situation(s). We need to stop genocide everywhere and work together. People who change their mind can be better.
Do you have any ideas of how we can get there?
Take your pick. There's the Hague, which is internationally recognized as a place to try war criminals. Or there could be a tribunal in Nuremberg since that's where they hanged (a woefully paltry number of) high-ranking Nazis after WWII. Or those war criminals could be handed over to People's Courts comprised of the families that survived having their loved ones murdered. Send Bush to Iraq, send Biden to Palestine, send Clinton to Libya.
As for your last question, consider it a wish-list. But if anyone in government actually had a conscience they would be demanding this too or seeking to change the laws to get the ball rolling. Gotta prosecute and punish the war criminals before they die of old age and escape to a Hell that will be far kinder on them than they deserve.
The list of folks guilty of war crimes is myriad and not limited to the presidents. Not trying to nitpick, but.... Agree Bush should be dragged along with Saudi Arabian parties responsible through Iraq & Afghanistan. Our 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, etc Oil controlling regime swapping political systems are responsible for so much turmoil in Libya, Afghanistan, and other parts of the middle east - it's reductive to try and blame a single president or country for this insanity.
I don't believe you could or should blame Biden singlehandedly for Palestine.
I feel like they have all of the Zionists, British imperialists, and American imperialists and political parties to blame for the last 75+ years to blame in that.
I like the idea of acknowledging this is a wish list. I don't believe there to be anywhere that will punish or reward them. I feel like that's another fairy tale.
are hitler and eichmann more culpable for the Holocaust than the average nazi officer?
Neither of those lessen the guilt that the Presidents bear, they simply expand the roster of people to try for abetting war crimes. When it comes to punishment, it's fine to start at the top and work down the hierarchies until someone feels like it's getting to be too much. Part of the point is revenge. Part of the point is to set an example. Clearly the Nuremberg trials didn't go far enough because the "Allies" didn't learn from it.
I argue for what's moral whether or not anyone else will listen. The realization that nobody who can try these war criminals will try them is another way to help people learn that we live in a fundamentally evil system that must be destroyed.
Ship them to Iran, they can arrange something there.
Yes the 'paragon of justice' known as Iran. I'm sure they've not committed any war crimes in the last 50 years. I'm sure a current felon didn't mess up a deal with them. Since the USA messed up their government, they have checks notes laws based on a guy who history records as having married a 9 year old in his adult life. A religion as flawed as every other, and also as worthless.
Yes, and... First rule of improv. (Never say no)
deleted by creator
Are you attacking a reply to a nonsensical comment? I'm trying to have civil conversation(s).
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
deleted by creator