I do think there is a difference, but I mostly agree.

Sen. Mendez is charged of an actual crime.

The other two I see the behavior as morally wrong, politically stupid, and dangerous. However, not all such things are crimes.

Those two need public and private challenge at every opportunity.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Individuals can rebuke and think what they wish of President Trump.

A public rebuke can only come from the polls, and rejection of policies that made him.

the largest possible rebuke that doesn't involve a court would be to put trump on every ballot and let the citizens give him the "Wave" again --

or put him through a trial -- and I am all for a trial -- it could have started Jan 22,2021, on citizen trump -

The mindset of a maga republican, and this guy is well acquainted with the mainstream GOP...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...8662bdbdb1135a&ei=45

quote:

Originally posted by skb:
It would help if conservatives stopped defending those involved in Trump's attempt at steal the election. Is it really that hard to understand? It is called accountability. Jim Jordan and Mike Johnson are no more worth defending than Bob Méndez is. Shitty behavior deserves to be called out.

Interesting attempt at a false comparison - Johnson wrote a (flawed - read it, you'll see) brief while mendez is accused of actual criminal acts -

case one - rooting for your team
case two - breaking many laws --

see the difference?

oh, yeah, case three - insider trading, but who's counting

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by skb:
It would help if conservatives stopped defending those involved in Trump's attempt at steal the election. Is it really that hard to understand? It is called accountability. Jim Jordan and Mike Johnson are no more worth defending than Bob Méndez is. Shitty behavior deserves to be called out.

Interesting attempt at a false comparison - Johnson wrote a (flawed - read it, you'll see) brief while mendez is accused of actual criminal acts -

case one - rooting for your team
case two - breaking many laws --

see the difference?

oh, yeah, case three - insider trading, but who's counting

and both ethically and morally wrong. Johnson sucks, just like Mendez.

I see very little difference between Johnson and Sydney Powell, Rudy, Jenna Ellis etc. All part of the conspiracy to steal the 2020 election. Johnson may not have committed a crime and he might be a bit smarter, his conduct is in no way better.

Case one is much more than rooting for your team, case one was an attempt to under a legitimate election. No need to put lipstick on a pig Jeffe.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Trump, if/once he is found to have participated in an insurrection deserves to face punishment. Aka retribution.

Trump once found guilty of mishandling classified documents will face retribution/punishment for doing so… hopefully.

Retribution is punishment given for something done, usually by the victims.

It’s just the lefties tend to use the term retribution when they mean unjustified punishment and say rule of law when they mean justified retribution.

I think you (ME) are reading a lot into my response that is not there.

I don't know what lefties mean by using the word "retribution", but it seems to not be what you mean, if they use the word at all regarding the justice/judicial system. That word seems to be something the rightists latched onto, following Trump's lead.

You used the word and it's loaded. Don't use that word anywhere in a discussion on the rule of law if you want to avoid confusion.

In Trumpster language it means vengeance, through the justice system when they get done with it, no matter how, and when they are in the process and when done they will still claim that they honor the constitution.

https://youtu.be/jzZTffmQEgI?si=l093Czf8UbxL1gwJ

https://youtu.be/hKBJEQxrs-k?si=jIhU7rWRerUfMBeT

https://youtu.be/1fjdUc9Ryyw?si=nI_45R0BYiOc49CV

quote:

Originally posted by skb:

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by skb:
It would help if conservatives stopped defending those involved in Trump's attempt at steal the election. Is it really that hard to understand? It is called accountability. Jim Jordan and Mike Johnson are no more worth defending than Bob Méndez is. Shitty behavior deserves to be called out.

Interesting attempt at a false comparison - Johnson wrote a (flawed - read it, you'll see) brief while mendez is accused of actual criminal acts -

case one - rooting for your team
case two - breaking many laws --

see the difference?

oh, yeah, case three - insider trading, but who's counting

and both ethically and morally wrong. Johnson sucks, just like Mendez.

I see very little difference between Johnson and Sydney Powell, Rudy, Jenna Ellis etc. All part of the conspiracy to steal the 2020 election. Johnson may not have committed a crime and he might be a bit smarter, his conduct is in no way better.

Case one is much more than rooting for your team, case one was an attempt to under a legitimate election. No need to put lipstick on a pig Jeffe.

you are just stuck on this --

Let's review CURRENT and ACTUAL charges

quote:

ROBERT MENENDEZ, 69, of Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, is charged with one count of conspiracy to commit bribery, which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison; one count of conspiracy to commit honest services fraud, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison; and one count of conspiracy to commit extortion under color of official right, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.

Johnson "Said" something you don't like, in a specifically protected speech exercise of his 1st amendment right --

Rudy? you see, he's actually being charged... see the difference? CHARGES... no CHARGES ... facts.. feels

Please present the ACTUALY legal charges against Johnson -- this isn't whataboutism - it's DUDE, let's stick to reality.

To be honest, I think Johnson is, at the very least, a poor choice for speaker and a dork --

but

he
hasn't
been
charged
with
anything --

You don't like him -- trust me, we get it -- YOU assert he's done terrible things, of which he's been charged with nothing.

As a person, i care about feelings, they are important -

In judging is someone a jacka$$ vs a criminal, you know, I am pretty good with the rule of LAW, and protecting their rights along the way ....

Oh, as mendez, I don't think he should resign until convicted - he should hang on to the bitter end, rather than tacitly admit guilt --
Let him have his day in court ....

oh, do get back to me when johnson is charged with sedition, -- i expect it would be after trump's trial.

I don't tend to work off feelings -- it doesn't seem to work out great for folks

In case you missed where retribution came from in this discussion, ME...

Note who wrote/quoted it and its place in this thread...

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...0cd96a37a83cdb&ei=43

Bill Barr warns of 'retribution,' 'chaos' in second Trump presidency

Former AG Bill Barr on Friday warned of what could be possible in a second Trump presidency

Bill Barr warns of 'retribution,' 'chaos' in second Trump presidency

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...0cd96a37a83cdb&ei=70

Donald Trump Threatens Joe Biden With Prosecution
Story by Kate Plummer • 12h

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...5a2c21740726b6&ei=31

Trump Tells Iowa Crowd He Will ‘Completely’ Overhaul Justice Department to Target DAs, AGs
Story by Mariana Labbate • 4h

I agree with jeffeosso on this one. I do believe Mendez should be expelled from the Senate if he refuses to resign. The burden of proof is different and the process due is different.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I agree with jeffeosso on this one. I do believe Mendez should be expelled from the Senate if he refuses to resign. The burden of proof is different and the process due is different.

When he said:

quote:

Oh, as mendez, I don't think he should resign until convicted - he should hang on to the bitter end, rather than tacitly admit guilt --
Let him have his day in court ....

?

I agree Menendez (ya'll could bother to get his name right) should resign his seat.

Alaska's Senator Ted Stevens didn't resign even after he was convicted of several crimes. He hung on until the voters ousted him in the next election.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by skb:

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by skb:
It would help if conservatives stopped defending those involved in Trump's attempt at steal the election. Is it really that hard to understand? It is called accountability. Jim Jordan and Mike Johnson are no more worth defending than Bob Méndez is. Shitty behavior deserves to be called out.

Interesting attempt at a false comparison - Johnson wrote a (flawed - read it, you'll see) brief while mendez is accused of actual criminal acts -

case one - rooting for your team
case two - breaking many laws --

see the difference?

oh, yeah, case three - insider trading, but who's counting

and both ethically and morally wrong. Johnson sucks, just like Mendez.

I see very little difference between Johnson and Sydney Powell, Rudy, Jenna Ellis etc. All part of the conspiracy to steal the 2020 election. Johnson may not have committed a crime and he might be a bit smarter, his conduct is in no way better.

Case one is much more than rooting for your team, case one was an attempt to under a legitimate election. No need to put lipstick on a pig Jeffe.

you are just stuck on this --

Let's review CURRENT and ACTUAL charges

quote:

ROBERT MENENDEZ, 69, of Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, is charged with one count of conspiracy to commit bribery, which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison; one count of conspiracy to commit honest services fraud, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison; and one count of conspiracy to commit extortion under color of official right, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.

Johnson "Said" something you don't like, in a specifically protected speech exercise of his 1st amendment right --

Rudy? you see, he's actually being charged... see the difference? CHARGES... no CHARGES ... facts.. feels

Please present the ACTUALY legal charges against Johnson -- this isn't whataboutism - it's DUDE, let's stick to reality.

To be honest, I think Johnson is, at the very least, a poor choice for speaker and a dork --

but

he
hasn't
been
charged
with
anything --

You don't like him -- trust me, we get it -- YOU assert he's done terrible things, of which he's been charged with nothing.

As a person, i care about feelings, they are important -

In judging is someone a jacka$$ vs a criminal, you know, I am pretty good with the rule of LAW, and protecting their rights along the way ....

Oh, as mendez, I don't think he should resign until convicted - he should hang on to the bitter end, rather than tacitly admit guilt --
Let him have his day in court ....

oh, do get back to me when johnson is charged with sedition, -- i expect it would be after trump's trial.

I don't tend to work off feelings -- it doesn't seem to work out great for folks

Jeffe,
You do not get it at all. It is not that I do not like something Johnson or Jordan said, it is that they are part of the conspiracy to steal the 2020 election. I can sort those who have been charged from those who have not, that does not make the ACTIONS that Jordan and Johnson took morally or ethically correct. They are scumbags, because they actively tried to help Trump in his attempt to usurp the American voter.

What I'm stuck on is that these two pieces of shit should be called out for the shitty behavior that they were involved in, whether or not it rose to the level of a crime I cannot say. I certainly can see it was wrong. If you took off you partisan blinders, you might see it too.

quote:

Originally posted by skb:
What I'm stuck on is that these two pieces of sh!t should be called out for the sh!tty behavior that they were involved in, whether or not it rose to the level of a crime I cannot say . I certainly can see it was wrong. If you took off you partisan blinders, you might see it too.

You know what removes blinders? a trial -

You know how ya'll rode Lane's keister about his religion and him attempting to "force" it on others? Well, I can't upload you a full length mirror, but your BELIEFS are clouding your critical judgement, even though you have made the most intelligent post (on matters not related to guns, as I think you are pretty awesome in that space), in acknowledging that you can't determine if their actions rose to the level of a crime - I don't know either, and i want them in a trial if the facts-that-you-and-i-don't-know can make a successful case - I simply don't know, and i WISH there would be a case to settle it

calling people out for behaviors is is more of a personal transaction with me - i'd rather say "yo, you know you were out of line here" - rather than calling for a mob, a rail, and pitch+feathers --

I get it, some people's beliefs brook zero challenge, and they respond with zealotry - i believe in the actual rule of law - find an authoritative court and a prosecutor willing to charge them, and let's have a trial.

anyway, it's a gorgeous day in texas, and I have some cool things to do today - I wish you all the best
j

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
In case you missed where retribution came from in this discussion, ME...

Note who wrote/quoted it and its place in this thread...

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...0cd96a37a83cdb&ei=43

Bill Barr warns of 'retribution,' 'chaos' in second Trump presidency

Former AG Bill Barr on Friday warned of what could be possible in a second Trump presidency

Bill Barr warns of 'retribution,' 'chaos' in second Trump presidency

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...0cd96a37a83cdb&ei=70

Donald Trump Threatens Joe Biden With Prosecution
Story by Kate Plummer • 12h

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...5a2c21740726b6&ei=31

Trump Tells Iowa Crowd He Will ‘Completely’ Overhaul Justice Department to Target DAs, AGs
Story by Mariana Labbate • 4h

============================================================
Retribution definition: punishment inflicted on someone as vengeance for a wrong or criminal act.

Does vengeance mean revenge?
vengeance. / (ˈvɛndʒəns) / noun. the act of or desire for taking revenge ; retributive punishment.

What is the difference between revenge and retribution?
The goal of retribution is to ensure that the punishment is commensurate to the offence, and in line with the expectations of society, while revenge is a form of retaliation that is emotionally driven and seeks to inflict personal punishment without regard for what is proportionate.
=================================================================

There is no doubt that the meaning when Trump uses the word "retribution" and when Barr uses it in reference to Trump's plans, they both mean revenge. And that's the way Trumpsters see it too. It's tit for tat with them, since they believe Trump's lies - specifically the claim that the liberal (Biden) justice system has been politically weaponized against him and thus all his followers. They think it's justified to give back a dose of their own medicine. Bottom line it's projection and corruption at its finest. The flopped/imploded anti-weaponization scheme headed by Gym Jordon is an example: https://www.google.com/search?...sclient=gws-wiz-serp

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by skb:
What I'm stuck on is that these two pieces of sh!t should be called out for the sh!tty behavior that they were involved in, whether or not it rose to the level of a crime I cannot say . I certainly can see it was wrong. If you took off you partisan blinders, you might see it too.

You know what removes blinders? a trial -

You know how ya'll rode Lane's keister about his religion and him attempting to "force" it on others? Well, I can't upload you a full length mirror, but your BELIEFS are clouding your critical judgement, even though you have made the most intelligent post (on matters not related to guns, as I think you are pretty awesome in that space), in acknowledging that you can't determine if their actions rose to the level of a crime - I don't know either, and i want them in a trial if the facts-that-you-and-i-don't-know can make a successful case - I simply don't know, and i WISH there would be a case to settle it

calling people out for behaviors is is more of a personal transaction with me - i'd rather say "yo, you know you were out of line here" - rather than calling for a mob, a rail, and pitch+feathers --

I get it, some people's beliefs brook zero challenge, and they respond with zealotry - i believe in the actual rule of law - find an authoritative court and a prosecutor willing to charge them, and let's have a trial.

anyway, it's a gorgeous day in texas, and I have some cool things to do today - I wish you all the best
j

I need a trial for a criminal conviction, not to say the actions taken to steal the 2020 election were wrong.

Jordan and Johnson were involved in the conspiracy, there are endless articles documenting it. That is enough for me to make a non-binding determination that has zero legal ramifications.

The information is there, those two are scumbags, they may or may not have committed a crime.

Crime:
/krīm/
noun
an action or omission that constitutes an offense that may be prosecuted by the state and is punishable by law.
"shoplifting was a serious crime"
Similar:
offense
unlawful act
illegal act
misdemeanor
misdeed
wrong
felony
violation
transgression
fault
injury
malfeasance
malefaction
tort
trespass
illegal activities.
"the victims of crime"
Similar:
lawbreaking
delinquency
wrongdoing
transgression
misconduct
criminality
illegality
villainy
felony
corruption
crookedness
shadiness
dodginess
malfeasance
malefaction
knavery
malversation
an action or activity that, although not illegal, is considered to be evil, shameful, or wrong.
"they condemned apartheid as a crime against humanity"

There's also the court of law and the court of public opinion.

Consequences for crime adjudicated pursuant to a court of law is obviously different than per the court of public opinion.

In the realm of the court of public opinion, Jordon, Johnson, and others in congress, have been rewarded for their parts in the conspiracy before, during and after 1/6. Yet others have been prosecuted in court, convicted or pled guilty, and several are serving time, for felony which includes seditious conspiracy to thwart or overturn the govt. The conspiracy didn't just happen on 1/6, but involved several people over time. IMO, Jordon, Johnson and several others are just as guilty as those already convicted of seditious conspiracy. Yet, it appears they got clean away with it.

Not only that, but they also tried in several ways to thwart investigations, evidence, and to help Trump with his lies and goal to avoid accountability. Their omissions are as bad as their commissions, and both are crimes, IMO.

Not only that: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...5c2ccaccd06856&ei=28

Trump’s rhetoric echoes a fascist commitment to a destructive and bloody rebirth: expert​

https://www.bing.com/search?q=...49a3ada83ec36046b372