Congress Quietly Passed A Bill Allowing Warrantless Searches of Homes

fact- he WAS found guilty by a judge. if he had requested a jury trial, that is what he would have gotten. calling a federal judge "liberal" is what you called "opinion" is it not? very Drumph- like. tar anyone that disagrees with you by applying a label that will discredit them in the views of those that DO agree with you. IMHO

armedoldhippy said:

fact- he WAS found guilty by a judge. if he had requested a jury trial, that is what he would have gotten. calling a federal judge "liberal" is what you called "opinion" is it not? very Drumph- like. tar anyone that disagrees with you by applying a label that will discredit them in the views of those that DO agree with you. IMHO

Click to expand...

Yes, my opinion is she is a liberal Fed Judge--although she is a registered as "indie" but she was appointed by Bill Clinton (who did not have a penchant of appointing conservative judges). And, we have her rulings on the many immigration cases she heard...and I challenge you to identify a single "conservative" ruling? Nope--all are more "liberal" than not and mirror liberal perspectives.

BTW, it is impossible to request a jury trial on a contempt charge...that judge has all the power.

And before you paint me with the same brush that you paint others that disagree with you, I doubt you will find a single post where I criticize or discredit anyone--because they disagree with me...lol. I love to hear/study/investigate different points of view, since those living in an echo chamber (hearing the same shit over and over) seldom learn new things. You see, I have learned more from people that disagreed with me...than those that I agree with; you ought to try it sometime--it is fun.

LOL, nice try my friend.

DocTim420 said:

Resin, I don't think using stoner logic to differentiate the difference between "fact" and "opinion" is the way to go. Perhaps this little blurb from Auburn University might help-- ww.auburn.edu/~murraba/fact.html

(add 3rd w to make link read "www.")



As you can see....Bias + Opinions ≠ Fact

The use of "descriptive words" usually indicates "opinion" or "bias", not "fact". (Nice shortcut to remember when debating opponents).

And no I was not at Kent State (May 1970), rather I was in Los Angeles area as an active protester against the Vietnam War (you see, there was a thing called "draft" going on and I was finishing High School and really did not want to got to war that was started by stupid politicians...my views at that time were super liberal).

Just so you know, in 1966 I was a long haired radical (hair longer than Jesus') and wrote "peace-nick" articles for our high school's "underground newspaper" and helped organize free speech/anti war protests (and flipped 4 finger lids).

Moose--the term "fascist pig" did not originate from Italy, rather the derogatory term originated as a result of cops (pigs) using their billly-clubs to beat war protestors to submission at the behest of the "fascist establishment".

You might say, the anti-war movement of the 60s sparked the "free speech" movement--with everyone protesting against "authoritarian establishment"....who wanted their students to shut up, sit down and get a hair cut. My experiences are first hand (since I was there) which may or may not agree with what you were taught. History has a way of being rewritten overtime.

IMO, to equate Sheriff Joe's "criminal contempt" (no jury--just a single liberal judge rendering this verdict) with bully-club swinging cops of the 60s that beat us anti-war teenagers merciless (aka "fascist pigs"), not only distorts the term "fascist pig", but, IMO, it also cheapens the efforts/progress we made nearly half a century ago.

In other words, please don't stand on the shoulders of giants (those before you) and then cheapen their accomplishments...just so you can "painlessly" advance your particular point of view.

Click to expand...

Stoner logic is what I got most of though. It's how I can best help the cause man. That's why I jump these threads, because it's on a stoner website. Believe me you wouldn't catch me on any other type of sites posting in these threads.

There are better informed and higher educated members that got the debate part covered. My goal, IS to discredit your posts in the minds of stoners by politely poking fun. "Clowning" if you will. Not trolling as I dont have anything against you personally and I do want to learn something. I'll never share your opinion on these subjects but I'm sure I can learn from you.

The real trick is getting you to reply. Your real picky. I would be too.

Truth is....It doesn't really matter if you reply directly to me or not. A failure to reply to my stoner logic posts, in minds of stoners is a fkn win and a reply allows me to do what I'm doing now! Like I said....it's what I do best!teehee

My 2nd grade teacher was the best I ever had, after that I don't think I met a one who could accomplish anything I didn't want them to accomplish. Not with me in the fkn room.haha There have got to be thousands of people who didn't learn a god damn thing because of me!haha I was asked to give speeches at two high school reunions where I apologized for trying to make sure they all never amounted to shit! Mind you....I quit school in 9th grade!haha

I'm the best there's ever been and I don't agree with your opinion on these subjects bro. That's all. It's how I'm making up for my sins!haha

Debates are best held between people of the same age anyway. No? You've been my age, I ain't been yours after all. So you boomers can have at it. This middle child is here to try and keep you from infecting the youngsters, one chuckle at a time. Not change your mind. If it happens, great, but honestly man..... have you ever, in any of you posts, budged an inch? I have. You should try it. It feels pretty good.

And about Vietnam, my dad a his 3 brothers were all drafted. Pops and 2 of my uncles were "in the shit". One actually got sent home just like "saving private Ryan". The 3 of them decided the oldest should go as he was an infantry medic, in the worst of it and had been in the longest. Their youngest brother was drafted AFTER the oldest had gotten back and never allowed to leave the states. He was a MP at the Presidio.

So on the one hand, I know all about the beating hippies took in Berkeley as he's told MANY stories of how he would bash their heads in!

On the other hand, I know about how hippies spat at my uncle when he got home. I've never heard him say a word about it as the 3 that were there NEVER talk about anything having to do with it, but the youngest, the MP, he always finished his stories with an explanation of why he'd done what he'd done.

As far as he was concerned....the hippies drew first blood!haha

So....I can appreciate a lot of what hippies accomplished and that some took beatings. I'll even apologize directly to you as my uncle might have kick your teeth in when you were younger but you may have been one of the bastards that hucked a loogie in my uncles eye so.....I'll hold back but I could have a big fuck you in pocket too.

With all that said...."giants"?

Martin Luther King was a giant. Cesar Chavez was a giant. Hippies kinda smelled and fucked in the mud at concerts.haha

If you are ok with joe then I think what ever it was that you may have had in you, that led you to believe you are a giant, well that shit prolly left you when you cut your hair!lol

Your kinda like Samson!haha

Except he knew he had lost his strength, was still able to grow his hair back, regain some of what he once was and kill himself.haha

You don't even realize it's missing. Your humanity that is.

Don't go killing yourself but maybe you should think about growing your hair back homie. Even if it only grows from out of your ear holes these days!haha

But remember..... Samson may have regained some of his strength by growing his hair but it was the suicide....... the suicide is what got him forgiven!haha

Fkn catholic school!lol

"Standing on the shoulders of giants who went before (me)"?

You think you know what about my activism, life's path, and travels?

You recommend others lessen their presumptuousness and learn something from those who disagree with them, but in what I see, that line and the two connected to it, reveals all the presumptuousness and projection I need to see.

DocTim420 said:

Yes, my opinion is she is a liberal Fed Judge--although she is a registered as "indie" but she was appointed by Bill Clinton (who did not have a penchant of appointing conservative judges). And, we have her rulings on the many immigration cases she heard...and I challenge you to identify a single "conservative" ruling? Nope--all are more "liberal" than not and mirror liberal perspectives.

BTW, it is impossible to request a jury trial on a contempt charge...that judge has all the power.

And before you paint me with the same brush that you paint others that disagree with you, I doubt you will find a single post where I criticize or discredit anyone--because they disagree with me...lol. I love to hear/study/investigate different points of view, since those living in an echo chamber (hearing the same shit over and over) seldom learn new things. You see, I have learned more from people that disagreed with me...than those that I agree with; you ought to try it sometime--it is fun.

LOL, nice try my friend.

Click to expand...

Gawd. When any federal judge tells a guy like Arpaio to cease & desist the only recourse is to appeal the ruling & quit doing what he was doing in the meanwhile.

He is an officer of the Court. The Court is the higher authority. Period. In defying the Court, Arpaio declared himself to be above the authority he served.

The 60's & the Nixon era? I'm class of '67. They were fascist pigs when they rousted us for looking like Hippie dopers & they're the same today when they roust people for looking like Mexicans.

Forget your disdain for illegals. Put yourself in the shoes of an American Citizen who looks like a Mexican in Sheriff Joe's jurisdiction. How's that feel?

moose eater said:

Just a piece of history, resin.

Somewhere in my family's heirlooms (all of my family of origin are dead now), from back when I was about 7 or 8, I still have an old crinkly, yellowed-with-age book that I would look through back then, titled something to the effect of 'America's History in Pictures.'

It had more than pictures in it, but every chapter was based in a black and white pictorial accounting. And it wasn't entirely about America's history. It had all sorts of land-mark occasions in it. One bit was dedicated to Mussolini's demise. His death was deservedly horrible. His own people dragged him through the streets, spitting on him, kicking him, and more, and they hung him upside-down with concertina wire, blood dripping from him; his girl friend, I think his chauffer, etc. Same fates. (*Note; always be aware of the karma of those you party with..)

Nationalism is at the very center of immigration laws in any country. Balancing nationalism, in my opinion, is crucial to remaining compassionate and humane... Again, in my opinion. Being overly proud of anything is toxic, and leads to toxic actions in many cases. Again, my opinion.

Excessive pride in one's Country, perceiving one's Country as having rights that the same prideful person would deny to other countries/persons, is where Nationalism becomes a cancer.

I had no say where I was born, when or where I was conceived, by whom, what my citizenship would be, or anything else during those times. I, like every person born on this planet, is, to some degree, a 'victim of circumstance,' for better or for worse.

I've long believed that in the concept of 'freedom of movement' (and I've traveled to places that demonstrate a whole lot more 'freedom of movement' than our Country practices), that what we might ought to do is ban governments and their sycophants/cheer-leaders from moving about the globe (governments seem to be much of the force behind a myriad of crises anyway), and let the People be free to roam where they will.

Years ago, had I been able to do as I chose with minimal barriers, and the concept of nationalism weren't the wall it often is, I'd have likely been spending the remainder of my days laying on a grassy knoll in the highlands of Nepal, smoking premium hand-rubbed black velvety hashish, or hooking giant lake trout in the early morning hours of any given sunny day in the Yukon Territory. But there's this whole nationalism thing.

Click to expand...

Good stuff moose. I read a little bit about Mussolini and man, you summed it up good.

Concertina wire! Had to look that up first!haha Man did they ever fuck him (and his people) up!

I grew up with an Italian kid who's parents still own the best Italian deli in the valley, San Carlo Italian Imports, if anybody's close.... gotta check it out. You won't be sorry. But I digress, there used to be a bunch of old men who hung out there. immagrants from Italy. I distinctly remember an argument breaking out between them one day which ended with an old man yelling "I don't vote! The last time I voted, I voted for Mussolini" as he stormed out.

Makes a lot more sense after a little reading.lol

I found the stuff you posted about nationalism and immigration really trippy too. Some concepts/ideas/thoughts that have never crossed my mind. Gotta think on them some more but that what it's all about.

The word Nationalism leaves a foul taste in my mouth. The word "culture" has that same kinda feel to it. Maybe a little more anxiety with "culture" than with "nationalism" but.....

Cool!! Always into a good tip on a good deli. I used to have Bavarian meats at Pike Place Market send up boxes of their landjaeger sausages, typically for moose hunting season, as they're a mostly-cold-smoked, dry-cured sausage with excellent non-refrigerated shelf stability.

I may not ever get down the lower-48 again, but if I do, there's a number of cities I have been fond of; Seattle, Minneapolis, Manhattan/NYC, San Francisco, and, over-seas, Amsterdam, Netherlands and Flensburg, Germany. All very people oriented, relatively clean, and each day there seemingly offering an enchanted adventure. But traveling days, other than trips to the Yukon Territory or around Alaska, are fewer and fewer.

Out of curiosity, what's your rub with the word 'culture.' Other than for, perhaps, the insinuation of homogeneity beyond reason within a specific group. (*Though there are greater and lesser trends or tendencies within such defined groups).

And yes, re. the end results for Mussolini and his peeps, I've raised my three kids, frequently telling them to hang out with folks whose karma they can respect. Bullets and force, or the delivery of instant karma, often takes place too quickly to get a good focus on where it's headed.

And a point of history I think people often don't see; there has never been a regime that operated with unbridled impunity and force, or systemic injustice, that didn't eventually fall hard as a result of its own excesses. It's like such leadership suffers from that phase most of us went through when we were 16, of believing "we're 10 ft. tall and bullet-proof."

I think if we were as spiritual and compassionate a Nation as we claim, we'd exude a greater sense of humility, grace, and thankfulness, for the reality and adage my sometimes accurate grandmother and mother used to reiterate; "There but by the grace of God go I."

resin_lung said:

Good stuff moose. I read a little bit about Mussolini and man, you summed it up good.

Concertina wire! Had to look that up first!haha Man did they ever fuck him (and his people) up!

I grew up with an Italian kid who's parents still own the best Italian deli in the valley, San Carlo Italian Imports, if anybody's close.... gotta check it out. You won't be sorry. But I digress, there used to be a bunch of old men who hung out there. immagrants from Italy. I distinctly remember an argument breaking out between them one day which ended with an old man yelling "I don't vote! The last time I voted, I voted for Mussolini" as he stormed out.

Makes a lot more sense after a little reading.lol

I found the stuff you posted about nationalism and immigration really trippy too. Some concepts/ideas/thoughts that have never crossed my mind. Gotta think on them some more but that what it's all about.

The word Nationalism leaves a foul taste in my mouth. The word "culture" has that same kinda feel to it. Maybe a little more anxiety with "culture" than with "nationalism" but.....

Click to expand...

@ moose- Well I wrote my reply to your question but it went so fkn long I couldn't bring myself to torture everybody by posting it. lol

Actually kinda feel like I spilt me guts!haha

It was kinda tough writing how I feel about it. Not sure if i expressed how I feel quite right but only so many hours in day!haha

Like I said.... it was originally written for open forum so I was more....careful than I probably needed to be for pm.

Either venue; let'er rip.

Not completely unfamiliar with gut spilling. Done a bit of it myself.

And I'm pretty well known for verbose or vociferous replies. So I guess in some ways it might be karmic justice. ;^>)

resin_lung said:

@ moose- Well I wrote my reply to your question but it went so fkn long I couldn't bring myself to torture everybody by posting it. lol

Actually kinda feel like I spilt me guts!haha

It was kinda tough writing how I feel about it. Not sure if i expressed how I feel quite right but only so many hours in day!haha

Like I said.... it was originally written for open forum so I was more....careful than I probably needed to be for pm.

Click to expand...

Jhhnn said:

Gawd. When any federal judge tells a guy like Arpaio to cease & desist the only recourse is to appeal the ruling & quit doing what he was doing in the meanwhile.

He is an officer of the Court. The Court is the higher authority. Period. In defying the Court, Arpaio declared himself to be above the authority he served.

The 60's & the Nixon era? I'm class of '67. They were fascist pigs when they rousted us for looking like Hippie dopers & they're the same today when they roust people for looking like Mexicans.

Forget your disdain for illegals. Put yourself in the shoes of an American Citizen who looks like a Mexican in Sheriff Joe's jurisdiction. How's that feel?

Click to expand...

Now you're thinking! Getting rousted and knocked on the head by a mean ugly dude wearing a badge while you exercise your constitutional rights--now that asshole is a fascist pig (my opinion).

But an elected official that disagrees with a Federal judge is not even in the same league as the baton wheeling asshole. BTW, libs, reps, indies all defy judges/congressional orders all the time...even certain impeached presidents and past Attorney Generals. Besides, judge's decisions are overturned by higher courts regularly; judges are not perfect.

BTW...I have zero disdain of people (legal/illegal/or wannabes), where did you get that idea? Intolerance is something I don't practice--rather listening to others with different points of view is a great way to learn from others (ought to try it sometimes! Its fun).

And Resin--while on traveling home from an overseas assignment I was in San Francisco airport wearing my Army uniform and this nice cute chick walks up to me, spits in my face and calls me a baby killer. Yeah, I know what your dad went through, we probably served about the same time doing the same shit, just different places with different people.

Moose--I don't know you're background or what paths you have tread and for the purposes of this discussion, it is immaterial. This is what I said--and notice the key word in quotes.

"In other words, please don't stand on the shoulders of giants (those before you) and then cheapen their accomplishments...just so you can "painlessly" advance your particular point of view."

Click to expand...

I protested a war which I later served in--and was bloodied in both. Usurping language from a bygone era and implying there is a "moral equivalence" to a particular view in today's world--might be OK with you, but might not be OK with those that bled.

In other words, suggesting someone that disobeys a judge's order is "morally equivalent" to a baton wheeling asshole cop that beats the shit out long haired war protesters...ahh, that is where we differ. It cheapens what we did--and it "painlessly" advances your particular point of view.

Also, if the term "fascist pig" was used prior to the 60s, then why is that term absent in all writings/articles/books/speeches prior to the 60s? I may be wrong here, but I am not aware of any use of the term "fascist pig" prior to the 60s. Are you?

DocTim420 said:

Yes, my opinion is she is a liberal Fed Judge--although she is a registered as "indie" but she was appointed by Bill Clinton (who did not have a penchant of appointing conservative judges). And, we have her rulings on the many immigration cases she heard...and I challenge you to identify a single "conservative" ruling? Nope--all are more "liberal" than not and mirror liberal perspectives.

BTW, it is impossible to request a jury trial on a contempt charge...that judge has all the power.

And before you paint me with the same brush that you paint others that disagree with you, I doubt you will find a single post where I criticize or discredit anyone--because they disagree with me...lol. I love to hear/study/investigate different points of view, since those living in an echo chamber (hearing the same shit over and over) seldom learn new things. You see, I have learned more from people that disagreed with me...than those that I agree with; you ought to try it sometime--it is fun.

LOL, nice try my friend.

Click to expand...

no "try" to it. you DID say the judge was a liberal, which was YOUR opinion. MY point. i WAS unaware that you could not request a jury trial in that scenario, thanks. if his conviction had been appealed, it would have gone to a different judge however. and i DO learm from those that disagree with me. there is nothing to learn from someone that parrots your every word. and, thank God we HAVE judges considered "liberal". life is so much simpler when the Puritans/bedrock Baptists/tea partiers are held at bay. how do you decide if a decision by a judge in a federal court is "liberal" or "conservative"? do you just look for the one that causes the most pain? or do you go to Fox news to see if they hated the decision?

according to a court ruling i just now read, you can demand a trial by jury for ANYTHING (including contempt, even in civil court) if you face the possibility of more than 6 months in jail or a fine of uncertain size.

Whomever passed this Caveman law should be forced to take the locks off of their homes.

To allow any member of the public 24/7 access all in the name of safety.

See how well that would go.

They would be the 1st ones yelling "No Warrant. No Search".

armedoldhippy said:

according to a court ruling i just now read, you can demand a trial by jury for ANYTHING (including contempt, even in civil court) if you face the possibility of more than 6 months in jail or a fine of uncertain size.

Click to expand...

Sheriff Joe' situation was exactly 6 months; no jury trial permitted (by design of the judge). Glad we can now agree on something; facts vs opinions--fun huh?

How do you determine a judge's political persuasion? By their actions, rulings and what they say in public.

One has to wonder what this judge's motive was--to wait about a month before the election to indict someone running for public office. Most judges will do anything, including bending over backwards via pretzel logic to avoid the appearance of affecting the outcome of our elections. This particular matter was not "time sensitive" and could have been filed after the election...but noooo.

I don't have a logical answer, why this judge expedited her indictment for maximum political impact.

Sometimes...actions speak louder than words.

DocTim420 said:

Now you're thinking! Getting rousted and knocked on the head by a mean ugly dude wearing a badge while you exercise your constitutional rights--now that asshole is a fascist pig (my opinion).

But an elected official that disagrees with a Federal judge is not even in the same league as the baton wheeling asshole. BTW, libs, reps, indies all defy judges/congressional orders all the time...even certain impeached presidents and past Attorney Generals. Besides, judge's decisions are overturned by higher courts regularly; judges are not perfect.

BTW...I have zero disdain of people (legal/illegal/or wannabes), where did you get that idea? Intolerance is something I don't practice--rather listening to others with different points of view is a great way to learn from others (ought to try it sometimes! Its fun).

And Resin--while on traveling home from an overseas assignment I was in San Francisco airport wearing my Army uniform and this nice cute chick walks up to me, spits in my face and calls me a baby killer. Yeah, I know what your dad went through, we probably served about the same time doing the same shit, just different places with different people.

Moose--I don't know you're background or what paths you have tread and for the purposes of this discussion, it is immaterial. This is what I said--and notice the key word in quotes.


I protested a war which I later served in--and was bloodied in both. Usurping language from a bygone era and implying there is a "moral equivalence" to a particular view in today's world--might be OK with you, but might not be OK with those that bled.

In other words, suggesting someone that disobeys a judge's order is "morally equivalent" to a baton wheeling asshole cop that beats the shit out long haired war protesters...ahh, that is where we differ. It cheapens what we did--and it "painlessly" advances your particular point of view.

Also, if the term "fascist pig" was used prior to the 60s, then why is that term absent in all writings/articles/books/speeches prior to the 60s? I may be wrong here, but I am not aware of any use of the term "fascist pig" prior to the 60s. Are you?

Click to expand...

I do love it. You're so eager to defend the precious Donald & his actions that you'll say anything, no matter how pretentious. The whole "usurping language of a bygone era" is particularly trite. We may have coined the term "Fascist Pig" 50 years ago but we have no moral exclusivity in being able to use it.

Even then, Fascist Pigs came in more flavors than riot police. Sheriff Joe was among them. He became a federal narc in 1957 while Harry Anslinger still headed the FNB & went on to retire as the head of the Arizona DEA 25 years later.

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

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

Given the way that the Counterculture & the anti-war movement were deeply intertwined the riot cops & the narcs were just different arms of the fascist machine.

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Ehrlichman

You know it's true. You're not fooling anybody but yourself.

Ahh, that is where you are wrong. I am not a defender of anyone, I call "stupid", stupid. I just disagree with the idea that there is a "moral equivalence" of what happened 40-50 years ago...can be applied to a Presidential Pardon of today. IMO it was "stupid"--especially since I was there and kinda know what happened.

BTW, I never defended Sheriff Joe's pardon in my posts, rather I injected there is a huge inconsistency of the moral outrage when it came to "presidential pardons"--since you are plainly anti-Trump.

You see my friend, life is not binary--to think either you are for or against something--no middle ground is rather foolish. One one can be supportive for this and that, but against specific inequities--we call that "neutral" or "mixed". Just like water faucets--there is one for "hot" and a second one for "cold" but if you want "warm", you will need both; not "one or the other".

Now...let's take a look at you. Everything the opposing party (Trumpy) does--you are against. I think the term for that particular behavior is "political". The term for calling "stupid", stupid is what..."honesty"?

IMO, the difference between now and 50 years ago is--protestors from different factions joined together to protest in unison; cops were the enemy. Today, protesters are fighting each other and the cops are standing by...letting God figure it out.

DocTim420 said:

Sheriff Joe' situation was exactly 6 months; no jury trial permitted (by design of the judge). Glad we can now agree on something; facts vs opinions--fun huh?

How do you determine a judge's political persuasion? By their actions, rulings and what they say in public.

One has to wonder what this judge's motive was--to wait about a month before the election to indict someone running for public office. Most judges will do anything, including bending over backwards via pretzel logic to avoid the appearance of affecting the outcome of our elections. This particular matter was not "time sensitive" and could have been filed after the election...but noooo.

I don't have a logical answer, why this judge expedited her indictment for maximum political impact.

Sometimes...actions speak louder than words.

Click to expand...

You're once again bending over backwards to believe things that aren't true. Reference-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#Conviction_for_contempt_of_court

Notice the timeline. Judge Snow (male) warned Arpaio to obtain a criminal defense attorney in Dec 2014 because of Arpaio's refusal to relent from his Unconstitutional racial profiling crusade against illegals. In the meanwhile, Arpaio hired an informant to find dirt on Snow using county funds, a sleazy attempt to gain political leverage-

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news...rshals--retrieve-mcso-evidence-abrk/30647253/

The criminal contempt case wasn't assigned to judge Bolton (female) until charges were filed in Oct 2016. If the Obama DoJ timed the filing to have maximum political impact, well, that's just the way the game is played. There are tears in my eyes as big as horseturds, I'm tellin' ya.

Trump's pardon is just more of the pandering to racist right wing authoritarians that Arpaio employed. There's a term you should study-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_authoritarianism

Jhhnn said:

You're once again bending over backwards to believe things that aren't true. Reference-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio#Conviction_for_contempt_of_court

Notice the timeline. Judge Snow (male) warned Arpaio to obtain a criminal defense attorney in Dec 2014 because of Arpaio's refusal to relent from his Unconstitutional racial profiling crusade against illegals. In the meanwhile, Arpaio hired an informant to find dirt on Snow using county funds, a sleazy attempt to gain political leverage-

https://www.azcentral.com/story/new...rshals--retrieve-mcso-evidence-abrk/30647253/

The criminal contempt case wasn't assigned to judge Bolton (female) until charges were filed in Oct 2016. If the Obama DoJ timed the filing to have maximum political impact, well, that's just the way the game is played. There are tears in my eyes as big as horseturds, I'm tellin' ya.

Trump's pardon is just more of the pandering to racist right wing authoritarians that Arpaio employed. There's a term you should study-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_authoritarianism

Click to expand...

So let me see if I got this right.

I view life differently than you--but you call me intolerant because I don't mirror your views. Got it (shakes head).

BTW, no bending here--if your flailing is supposed to convince me your ideas are superior, sorry it didn't work and I don't play those games. Behaving like an evangelist at revival tent is a big turnoff for most people. Besides, it shows your lack of respect to those that think differently. Breaking news--no one has a monopoly on "good ideas" or "righteousness"...and that includes me and you.

I believe people should be independent and believe whatever the fuck they want (even if I think they are wrong). Imposing my beliefs on others is, imo...rather immature and real stupid.

I think we can agree that "foolish people" are best served when they are told what to think, what to do, and when. I think the term that best describes this behavior is "sheeple". I don't read talking points, I don't type talking points, I don't talk talking points...as I am not a political player...nor a "sheeple".

Unlike you, I have zero political affiliation and can freely call "stupid", stupid. Whereas you are handicapped--you can only call your "opponents" stupid--but required to close your eyes, stick fingers in ears and sing lalalalalalalalalala when stupidity is conducted by your own kind. Ahhh the freedom to fart anywhere and smile with a big sigh of relief.

BTW, a little dosage of "respect" with a dash of "individuality" is probably a better formula to persuade others to your point of view. Your current tactic of 100% "head bashing" has not achieved much success....has it?

IMO, the difference between now and 50 years ago is--protestors from different factions joined together to protest in unison; cops were the enemy. Today, protesters are fighting each other and the cops are standing by...letting God figure it out.

fifty years ago when peace protesters marched, many times construction workers etc attacked them. cops were ONE of the enemy. myself, i'm enjoying the fact that there IS an anti-fascist element in this country, willing to fight back against so-called "conservative" groups carrying guns in public in a blatant attempt at intimidating other voices...i am far from being an anti-gunner, but the pendulum needs to swing back the other way when firearms are carried in public in an obvious effort to frighten folks. perfect recipe for a damn gunfight on public streets...JMHO

DocTim420 said:

So let me see if I got this right.

I view life differently than you--but you call me intolerant because I don't mirror your views. Got it (shakes head).

BTW, no bending here--if your flailing is supposed to convince me your ideas are superior, sorry it didn't work and I don't play those games. Behaving like an evangelist at revival tent is a big turnoff for most people. Besides, it shows your lack of respect to those that think differently. Breaking news--no one has a monopoly on "good ideas" or "righteousness"...and that includes me and you.

I believe people should be independent and believe whatever the fuck they want (even if I think they are wrong). Imposing my beliefs on others is, imo...rather immature and real stupid.

I think we can agree that "foolish people" are best served when they are told what to think, what to do, and when. I think the term that best describes this behavior is "sheeple". I don't read talking points, I don't type talking points, I don't talk talking points...as I am not a political player...nor a "sheeple".

Unlike you, I have zero political affiliation and can freely call "stupid", stupid. Whereas you are handicapped--you can only call your "opponents" stupid--but required to close your eyes, stick fingers in ears and sing lalalalalalalalalala when stupidity is conducted by your own kind. Ahhh the freedom to fart anywhere and smile with a big sigh of relief.

BTW, a little dosage of "respect" with a dash of "individuality" is probably a better formula to persuade others to your point of view. Your current tactic of 100% "head bashing" has not achieved much success....has it?

Click to expand...

I'm sure you won't let facts interfere with the formulation of your opinions, such as they are. Until you do, you won't get much respect from anybody who values the truth.

So I ask you, point blank, why you would defend Arpaio & Trump for any reason other than agreeing with Arpaio's methods of cleansing America of the "scourge of illegal immigration" as Trump does here-

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/08/25/president-trump-pardons-sheriff-joe-arpaio

I'll bet you didn't even notice what was really said here-

"Throughout his time as Sheriff, Arpaio continued his life’s work of protecting the public from the scourges of crime (executing the War on Drugs) and illegal immigration (aggressive racial profiling, hassling & arresting brown people just trying to get by).

Trump knows what he's doing & the sentiments to which he panders. Make no mistake about that.