What Are You Going To Do About It? by Robert Gore at STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC
Justice and equality are inseparable. Equality here does not mean the fatuous and impossible equality of outcomes that animates collectivists, but equality before the law. Equality of outcomes in all its collectivist guises obliterates equality before the law, the foundation of which is the concept of individual rights. For that concept to have any meaning, each individual must have the same rights, which receive the same protection from the government. Individual, equal rights must be the basis of the law, and when they are not, no justice is possible.
Law instead becomes a tool wielded by those who control the government against everyone else. Yesterday’s announcement by FBI Director James Comey that the FBI would recommend against charging Hillary Clinton in the email matter is the government wielding the law to protect its own. The fix has been in since at least 1913, when it gave itself permission to steal its constituents’ money (the income tax) and to begin the process of profitably substituting its scrip for gold (the Federal Reserve Act). The Clinton fix is business as usual. The exempt-from-the-law class expect outrage and contemptuously ignore it. Indeed, disclosure of the Loretta Lynch-Bill Clinton meeting may have been designed to rub the noses of the not-exempt in it. Yes, it looks terrible, but we run things, you don’t. You don’t like it? Tough shit, what are you going to do about it?
This is an excerpt. For the full article, please click the above link.
Law instead becomes a tool wielded by those who control the government against everyone else. Yesterday’s announcement by FBI Director James Comey that the FBI would recommend against charging Hillary Clinton in the email matter is the government wielding the law to protect its own. The fix has been in since at least 1913, when it gave itself permission to steal its constituents’ money (the income tax) and to begin the process of profitably substituting its scrip for gold (the Federal Reserve Act). The Clinton fix is business as usual. The exempt-from-the-law class expect outrage and contemptuously ignore it. Indeed, disclosure of the Loretta Lynch-Bill Clinton meeting may have been designed to rub the noses of the not-exempt in it. Yes, it looks terrible, but we run things, you don’t. You don’t like it? Tough shit, what are you going to do about it?
This is an excerpt. For the full article, please click the above link.
And I paraphrase: 'People manage to shake off their dependence just long enough to select their new master and then relapse back into dependence, quite contented they had done enough for the protection of individual freedom; when, in fact, they just surrendered it to the power of the nation at large."
None of the Above and Consent Withdrawn are looking like mighty good choices.
i also have a novel i am outlining about the election in 2020...The Pledge...
After clicking the link, also click onto "cartoons." They will help you feel better.
http://townhall.com/columnists/kurtsc...
I just feel a bit resentfully stuck with Trump, who is not the conservative I would really prefer.
I loathe Shillary and all she stands for.
She is far worse than Tricky Dicky too.
I'm still gonna vote for that bad hair day cock-a-doodle-do.
Excuse me while I go pull out something stuck in my cheek.
"Tough shit", indeed.... I hope the 'American sense of smell' has not degraded beyond the ability to distinguish what is palatable.
A few of my past echoes:
https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...
https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...
(Link is not going to the article. It goes to a login prompt instead. Maybe it's the link to edit the article;^)
Scenario #1 (didn’t happen): Hillary is recommended for indictment. The Dems find a way to block her nomination and replace her with someone equally bad, but without all the baggage. This candidate becomes our next President.
Scenario #2 (might happen): Hillary is “cleared”. Dems are stuck with her, as she continues to gradually lose ground to Trump in the polls, and Gary Johnson maintains his double-digit presence. The presidency is still up for grabs, and a Libertarian is very much still in the race.
The overreach and outrage may have come at just the right time to derail the Clinton machine once and for all.
.
Courts evolved a process to determine:
1. Is there a debt?
2. Who is responsible for the debt?
3. How will the debt be paid?
4. Issue an Order re: #3
Hildebeast created a "debt" when she broke the law. The court process has shown itself to be corrupt. Welcome to the Banana Republic of the United States.
Real simple, I will vote for Trump. Do I completely agree with his positions? No! Do I even like him? Not really. Do I think he is THE ONLY CANDIDATE WHO MIGHT BEAT HER! Yup and that's why he gets my vote.
Voted for Cruz in the primary before he turned me off by talking about "sacrifice" donations and how trouble Soros and MoveOn paid for being all Trump's fault.
Should Johnson rise high in the polls I may think otherwise. But I don't like him either.
Me dino don't like anyone.
Me feel like the Jurassic Period Allosaurus big time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8l-e...
I have been registered as a libertarian for a long time now, but I have to say I thought Johnson was a bit too bubbly, non charismatic, and philosophically challenged to actually have any chance of being elected. His stand on anti-drug laws was lame and disintegrated by one woman voter in the CNN town hall he did. Hillary would make mincemeat of him.
That leaves Trump. He says what a LOT of us are thinking but are afraid to say out loud. His presentation is a bit out there, but our election process is really stupid and one needs to either spend huge amounts of money, or get free media attention by being outlandish.
If you watch the CNN town hall with Anderson Cooper (its on youtube), we see another side of Trump through the eyes of his children. It was quite impressive actually, and after watching that I was a lot more comfortable with him. The apples dont fall far from the tree. Ivanka Trump was very impressive. I wish SHE were running !!
Wrote it in the Gulch before that Constitution Cruz looked a little too much like a relative of the Addams Family to win, but I voted for him anyway. .
Agree with you about Johnson. Once upon a time, I called myself a Republican and then a Libertarian.
Now I'm just a freaking independent old-fashioned American dinosaur who does not think the Constitution of our Founding Fathers is extinct.
Way I see it, voting for bad hair day is an attempt to protect the Constitution.
The above statement is subject to change depending on what may or may not happen next between now and November.
Me dino thought that funny.;
That's funny. It reminds me of an engineering conference I went to in Vegas earlier this year that really felt like the Nerds in Paradise movie. We nerds now have a candidate. :)
"Gave Johnson every opportunity to get the message out, but except for a couple of statements"
I wonder if that's intentional. I wonder if his audience is not people who really think about gov't and policy but rather people who watch it casually who might remember two catchphrases if he repeats them enough.
"Fiscally conservative, socially liberal" is a cliche. 30 Rock made fun of it subtly by having the protagonist give a glib "socially conservative, fiscally liberal," answer to her opinion on politics. She delivered it an wonderfully perfunctory tone that suggests it was said with such little thought she didn't even notice she had the cliche backwards.
If I'm right that this is a bromide people tell themselves, maybe it's smart for Johnson to repeat it too. Someone checking on their kid while reviewing their to-do list for tomorrow on Asana or Wrike might hear it from the TV in the other room and realize Johnson's the person they want to vote for.
I think President Obama and Hillary Clinton are excellent at managing a country with an expensive and intrusive central gov't. That's not a good thing. But buying into the political game of their opponents and demonizing them, IMHO, actually hurts the cause of liberty.
Yes, that is my whole point. Once the law becomes a fig leaf to hide rule of men, there is no more liberty.
Carelessness with classified data is criminal action and the statute does not require intent only the action.
But I don't think it's fair to protest that "the statute does not require intent" as if that were a moral principle. The law ought to require intent for all felonies. Otherwise you get tragedies like Aaron Swartz and outrages like the Martha Stewart prosecution.
Demonizing the likes of Clinton and Obama, on the other hand, is both necessary and right.
Negligence in custodial duties for classified information can and should be prosecuted. Just as other negligent actions can be.
Charges should be filed, actually replace should with must.
Other people have been prosecuted for similar actions, not prosecuting her is a shot in the head to the rule of law.
How do you prove intent??? That is a mental state. Until someone perfects telepathy intent cannot be proven beyond a doubt.
My moral outrage over this is the double standard being applied.
It was for slowing not stopping for a stop sign with no other visible traffic around. I still sere other people do that--even cops!
Back then I was but a babe in the woods.
Shillary is a career criminal Clintonista pampered because she is among the top Progressive more than equal elites with too many world wide donating cronie$ to fail. .
than the opposition, IMHO. . I want the opposition to
apply the brakes while the Gary Johnsons of the world
gain strength. -- j
.