Why do right wingers want to end democracy?

@averagejoe1 said
Then, there are _______ Democrats, and there are Democrats who are merely adrpt political manipulators. ( you left that out)
Do you see how insipid? Your posts dom’t close. Your audience waits for the other shoe to drop, it doesn’t. Like…..So?? Must we always close the posts of liberals, for the liberals?

YOU LIE
You never close threads with FACTS.

@sonhouse said
If they get their way there will BE no more democracy in the US and those right wing traitors want EXACTLY that.
Look at Jim Jordan, hemming and hawing about what phone calls he had with Trump on Jan 6 last year, it was clear he KNEW he was in deep legal trouble and could in fact find himself in jail as a traitor and that is just the tip of the iceberg of traitors in the re ...[text shortened]... e senate and house again so they can codify the destruction of democracy right in front of our eyes.

Lois Lerner taught us all that refusal to respond to a US House Subpoena is a right we all have.

@techsouth said
Lois Lerner taught us all that refusal to respond to a US House Subpoena is a right we all have.

That's BS. Lerner asserted her 5th Amendment rights and thus could not be prosecuted for contempt of Congress for not testifying. https://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/lois-lerner-no-contempt-charges-justice-department-116577 That is a real right; there is no "right" to refuse to respond to a US House subpoena (Lerner, of course, did respond).

We'll see if those subpoenaed to testify before the January 6th Committee assert their right not to incriminate themselves.

@no1marauder said
That's BS. Lerner asserted her 5th Amendment rights and thus could not be prosecuted for contempt of Congress for not testifying. https://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/lois-lerner-no-contempt-charges-justice-department-116577 That is a real right; there is no "right" to refuse to respond to a US House subpoena (Lerner, of course, did respond).

We'll see if those subpoenaed to testify before the January 6th Committee assert their right not to incriminate themselves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finding_Lois_Lerner_in_contempt_of_Congress

Marauder, your post is what I am always grousing about. You reel off this academia all well and good, I am sure it is correct. But would you pontificate like this if we were having a beer, without at least acknowledging what this horrible woman did? Targeting people based on their names or political themes.
Me, I would go over with th forum what the woman DID. How bad her process was. You and I would take the 5th in a heartbeat, so we can go sit on the porch at the end of the day. I'm with that part of the law. But she is slime, a democratic puppet of Obama et al to do down-dirty bidding.
Yet in your posts, you just ignore the guts of an issue, and just float along with your Nexus Lexis and teach us the law. Hell, why should the members learn the law if Democrats don't give a crap about following the law. (that is a question).
And try a bit of humor while you are at it. I would call you a bot, but I don't know what a bot is!! (see, a little humor in this very sentence).

@contenchess said
@jimm619

The fact is (not so much you but)... sonhouse thinks we are one day away from Nazis marching up and down the streets.

That is absurd and laughable. 😄

What do you mean, 'WE?'

@averagejoe1 said
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finding_Lois_Lerner_in_contempt_of_Congress

Marauder, your post is what I am always grousing about. You reel off this academia all well and good, I am sure it is correct. But would you pontificate like this if we were having a beer, without at least acknowledging what this horrible woman did? Targeting people based on their names or poli ...[text shortened]... ould call you a bot, but I don't know what a bot is!! (see, a little humor in this very sentence).

Yeah, I can well understand
your frustration, joe.
Hard to refute ACTUAL FACTS, isn't it?

@averagejoe1 said
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finding_Lois_Lerner_in_contempt_of_Congress

Marauder, your post is what I am always grousing about. You reel off this academia all well and good, I am sure it is correct. But would you pontificate like this if we were having a beer, without at least acknowledging what this horrible woman did? Targeting people based on their names or poli ...[text shortened]... ould call you a bot, but I don't know what a bot is!! (see, a little humor in this very sentence).

You can rest assured they will take the 5th
Roger Stone already has; next up, Steve Bannon.
It's a Constitutional right.

@no1marauder said
That's BS. Lerner asserted her 5th Amendment rights and thus could not be prosecuted for contempt of Congress for not testifying. https://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/lois-lerner-no-contempt-charges-justice-department-116577 That is a real right; there is no "right" to refuse to respond to a US House subpoena (Lerner, of course, did respond).

We'll see if those subpoenaed to testify before the January 6th Committee assert their right not to incriminate themselves.

No two situations are ever identical. But one thing we can always be sure of is that leftist always pick some difference and assert that is the key that makes the people on the left good, moral, and innocent and the people on the right bad, evil, and guilty.

Personally, I find it a useful exercise to find similar cases where roles are reversed and consider whether or not my thinking is consistent or not in order to detect and overcome my own personal bias. But if it's only a matter of finding a difference, I could always find a difference and declare myself bias free in my own eyes.

Lerner was employed in a high position for the US government and conveniently her hard drive "crashed" and conveniently not long after the IRS "accidently" deleted backup tapes. It is quite reasonable for an employer to question an employee about job conduct.

Meanwhile, a mob on Jan 6th did what mobs often do. And now congress is asserting the right to access private communication of people who were not in the mob. Even though in the months beforehand mobs caused billions of dollars in damage through out the US and congress has no curiosity as to what politicians may have been working behind the scenes.

To me, this does not seem like we are living in a world where our politicians are behaving consistently nor fairly. I have enough self awareness to know I have biases and I have attempted to find similar events where the "teams" are reversed. I don't look for "identical" events, because they never exist.

But you, I presume are a bias-free individual and don't need to do any self-reflection on your own bias. And I'm sure you're able to give me a few other "differences" between these cases that are key and can explain why we can be confident the the Democrats are just objectively and dispassionately working to seek truth and for the good of the American people and the Republicans have only engaged in witch-hunts for their own greed and thirst for power.

@techsouth said
No two situations are ever identical. But one thing we can always be sure of is that leftist always pick some difference and assert that is the key that makes the people on the left good, moral, and innocent and the people on the right bad, evil, and guilty.

Personally, I find it a useful exercise to find similar cases where roles are reversed and consider whether or n ...[text shortened]... eople and the Republicans have only engaged in witch-hunts for their own greed and thirst for power.

One thing's a cinch,
wasn't a leftist mob that
stormed The Capitol or bombed
The Murtaugh Building in O.K.C.
Finally, it isn't leftists that The F.B.I.
calls ''the greatest domestic threat,''
to peace and tranquility.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/fbi-believes-us-faces-equal-threats-domestic-extremists-islamic-state-official-2021-11-03/
https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-white-supremacy-biggest-domestic-threat-us-wray-says-1573320

@averagejoe1 said
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finding_Lois_Lerner_in_contempt_of_Congress

Marauder, your post is what I am always grousing about. You reel off this academia all well and good, I am sure it is correct. But would you pontificate like this if we were having a beer, without at least acknowledging what this horrible woman did? Targeting people based on their names or poli ...[text shortened]... ould call you a bot, but I don't know what a bot is!! (see, a little humor in this very sentence).

The gist of the IRS non-scandal wasn't what I was responding to; unlike you, I actually read what other posters say and try to stay on the topic they raised.

But Lerner didn't do anything actually wrong and what the lower level employees did was an understandable breach of protocols which really did no harm:

"The IRS must review applications from groups that wish to claim various types of tax-exempt status. Although most people are familiar with so-called 501(c)(3) organizations, commonly known as charities, there are several other types of organizations that are tax-exempt (although donations to them are not tax deductible) for other reasons. The story here revolves around applications for 501(c)(4) status, or what are commonly known as social welfare organizations.

In early 2013, one of the Treasury Department’s inspectors general issued a report saying that the IRS had used inappropriate methods to screen applications for 501(c)(4) status. Because such groups are prohibited from spending the majority of their funds on political activities, IRS screeners thought that it made sense to sort applications first by looking at groups whose names seemed obviously political.

We now know (as I wrote in my October 9, 2017 column) that the screeners used search terms that implicated both right-wing and left-wing groups—terms like “tea party,” “patriot,” and “9/12,” but also “occupy,” “green,” and similarly suggestive words. Such groups’ applications for 501(c)(4) status were then subjected to more exacting scrutiny, to determine whether they truly met the legal standards for social welfare (that is, mostly non-political) groups.

Even though this might have seemed like a sensible approach, it was wrong, amounting to having a government agency make decisions on the basis of apparent political views rather than on the law. The inspector general’s report made clear that, although it took some time to fix the problem, the non-lawyers at the IRS who had come up with the screening idea had been set straight, and there was no ongoing violation of the proper procedures for processing applications."

https://verdict.justia.com/2018/03/08/damage-wake-non-scandal-irs

Nothing particularly "horrible" there.

@jimm619 said
One thing's a cinch,
wasn't a leftist mob that
stormed The Capitol or bombed
The Murtaugh Building in O.K.C.
Finally, it isn't leftists that The F.B.I.
calls ''the greatest domestic threat,''
to peace and tranquility.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/fbi-believes-us-faces-equal-threats-domestic-extremists-islamic-state-official-2021-11-03/
https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-white-supremacy-biggest-domestic-threat-us-wray-says-1573320

Finally. Someone has given me a totally dispassionate objective objective take on a set of situations. Now I, too, can see things with a complete absence of bias.

@techsouth said
Finally. Someone has given me a totally dispassionate objective objective take on a set of situations. Now I, too, can see things with a complete absence of bias.

Wrong, I'm a progressive,
but REUTERS isn't.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/reuters/
Overall, we rate Reuters Least Biased based on objective reporting and Very High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing of information with minimal bias and a clean fact check record.

@no1marauder said
The gist of the IRS non-scandal wasn't what I was responding to; unlike you, I actually read what other posters say and try to stay on the topic they raised.

But Lerner didn't do anything actually wrong and what the lower level employees did was an understandable breach of protocols which really did no harm:

"The IRS must review applications from groups that wish to ...[text shortened]... /verdict.justia.com/2018/03/08/damage-wake-non-scandal-irs

Nothing particularly "horrible" there.

Jan 6 bad. Lerner actions good. At least you fellers entertain us with some real (never resolved) brainteasers.
The next one will be that the Taser Lady is off to serious jail time. So how will Alec Baldwin fare? I mean the verdict. We KNOW how he would fare in prison. Ouch.

@averagejoe1 said
Jan 6 bad. Lerner actions good. At least you fellers entertain us with some real (never resolved) brainteasers.
The next one will be that the Taser Lady is off to serious jail time. So how will Alec Baldwin fare? I mean the verdict. We KNOW how he would fare in prison. Ouch.

Yeah, let's discuss all the issues,
no matter how long ago or trivial
they may seem............ Know what?
I really think that Richard Nixon should
have destroyed the incriminating tapes.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BTY........Just so you know, cops don't
fare very well in prison, especially, I imagine,
after killing a black man, at a traffic stop.