Whenever the FBI are brought up, all I can think back to is how accurate the AI generated greentext was...
This is basically Timothy McVeigh's story as well, which is both hilarious and infuriating.
Five minutes of hate news
- Thread starter PsihoKekec
- Start date
This is basically Timothy McVeigh's story as well, which is both hilarious and infuriating.
Doomsought
Well-known member
Remember, Whitmer overthrew the lawful government of Michigan in a non violent coup. Not only would Killing dictator Whitmer have been entirely legal, but the FBI also committed treason by protecting her.
I actually don't remember that, she did what?!
And if so, why the hell wasn't the DOJ all up in her ass? Instead of carrying water for it? oh wait.,..she's a commie..never mind.
Doomsought
Well-known member
Her Covid lockdowns were run by dictatorship. The Michigan constitution does not allow state money to go out without legislature approval, even if you win a lawsuit against the state. She spent state money while the legislature was suspended for fear of covid.
Sobek
Disgusting Scalie
The NYT out here with the best of takes
www.nytimes.com
They changed the title. The original is much more honest.
Opinion | The Worst People Run for Office. It’s Time for a Better Way.
Leaders are less likely to be corrupt when they’re chosen at random.
They changed the title. The original is much more honest.
King Arts
Well-known member
I mean it is true and would be better than our system.The NYT out here with the best of takes
Opinion | The Worst People Run for Office. It’s Time for a Better Way.
Leaders are less likely to be corrupt when they’re chosen at random.
They changed the title. The original is much more honest.
I'd like to see what happens in a nation with a randomly selected, rotating leadership.The NYT out here with the best of takes
Opinion | The Worst People Run for Office. It’s Time for a Better Way.
Leaders are less likely to be corrupt when they’re chosen at random.
They changed the title. The original is much more honest.
I mean, I anticipate it crashed and burns catastrophically. But in Case it doesn't? I'd be interested to watch it play out. Somewhere else. Not here.
There's points to be made that it might actually be less corrupt. But there's issues with competence. Of course we have issues with competence with elections, too so...idk. would be interesting.
mrttao
Well-known member
Randomly selected citizens are bad... but not as bad as very carefully selecting the most corrupt pedophiles we can find.
That said, there should be some vetting going on rather than total randomness.
DarthOne
☦️
Ah, but who can we trust to do the vetting?
Lets be frank here- our current issues boil down to political apathy in the general population cause in part by a dumbing down of the citizenry, a tangled mess of laws that are impossible for the average citizen to keep track of, people having to work to the bone just to make ends meet.
mrttao
Well-known member
Yep. Although my idea was more of people voting for vetoes.
But just like with fake vote counting it will be corrupted.
Also who can we trust to make sure it is truly random.
True.
Ultimately, people are realizing that democracy is unable to protect what people value, including civil rights. Every government is going to act as a mafia, enriching its members by exploiting non members. The only good part about democracy is that it makes it more expensive (in political capital) to exploit the government, but it will still happen.
Whitmer did allegedly unconstitutional stuff. So the courts then decide if it is. The law doesn't let you murder as a way to find out.
Not how legality works, like at all.
Whitmer did allegedly unconstitutional stuff. So the courts then decide if it is. The law doesn't let you murder as a way to find out.
Last edited:
That was a essentially what Sparta had IIRC and some other Greek City States and the only reason it worked was because their "Kings" could be deposed and accused of treason and put on trial every decade by any citizen.
Even if they were innocent.
All you had to do is accuse them and it'd wreck their lives for a few months out of the year until acquitted. That social pressure against public officials was what kept them at least 50% honest.
To be fair Democracy is and always has been shit and we live in a Republic, that used to have waayyy more breaks against the Federal Government than it does now.
mrttao
Well-known member
"worked"
also they were automatically put on trial at the end of their term. not could, but always auto trial. there they had to defend themselves and every decision they made.
what happened was you had a perfectly static govt. Still had corruption btw too.
sparta died slowly over many years. And there were many solutions proposed. but none of the solutions were used because the govt was afraid of the mandatory end term trials.
It had corruption out the wazoo, yeah but it also mitigated the abuses against citizens.
I'd rather a Roman-inspired model where Senators (Who should be chosen by the party leadership on a local level not via vote.) are able to accuse Presidents and cabinet members of treason and force a trial no matter what. So long as they had 500k signatures on a petition from their states.
Doomsought
Well-known member
No. The courts did not exist. What she did goes all the way into war territory.
If the courts 'didn't exist', then why'd you say it was legal? You are making a statement here that completely contradicts your previous argument:
You could have said it would be moral, and at least you'd be able to have an argument, but this is an incoherent set of positions. "Killing a person would be legal" + "The courts did not exist, so your argument that this was illegal is invalid" does not add up well.
Also, it's objectively wrong? The courts certainly did exist. They were there, sentencing people for crimes both real and BS, clearly defining what was and wasn't legal, regardless of our moral disagreements with them.
mrttao
Well-known member
> When someone overthrows the govt you are supposed to sue them
Right. Your country has some hitler? pot pol? mao? stalin? putin? sadam?
Don't rebel! that is unlawful!
sue them! The courts are absolutely bastions of integrity and will rule that they are an illegal govt. which will instantly teleport them into prison
/sarcasm
regardless. the guy didn't even do rebelling.
rather, he joined a militia group for a time. which turned out to have been a govt honeypot.
then the FBI agents proposed kidnapping the governor.
And AFAIK only ones who didn't leave when this was proposed were undercover police and the FBI.
which makes it entrapment.
Wow, way to entirely misread what I wrote. I said X wasn't legal, because @Doomsought said something unbelievably dumb.
And then you come down here going "Ha! You said they should use the courts (I didn't) and that position I'm going to claim you took was dumb! And I bet you didn't know it was entrapment too!"
All I said that courts decide what is and isn't legal, (which they do by definition, basically, as part of the government). And shockingly, the government is (almost) never going to consider killing a government figure as legal.
As for the entrapment: Everyone on the site knows that practically. It's old news, not the gotcha you are looking for.