You’re never going to get a straight answer out of the renowned Eugene Debs fanboy BSB
You’re never going to get a straight answer out of the renowned Eugene Debs fanboy BSBSo did Eugene Debs, hence why I asked you about him. So I’d like an answer please. Was it a disgrace that socialist Eugene Debs was allowed to run for president in 1920?
Or is it one rule for politicians you like and another for politicians you dislike?
Never made the argument about him not standing.
I was arguing your belief that charging him led to his re-election and he wouldn't have even won the primaries if he hadn't. This is just horseshit. His support is like a cult and it doesn't matter what he does, they will support him and attack anyone else who doesn't. As Trump himself said, he could stand on 5th Avenue and shoot someone and he wouldn't lose any votes.
oh, as for the socialist in prison thing, as you've pointed out it was for sedition. Hardly the biggest thing and quite often a bullshit charge used by people in power to silence political rivals. So clearly it depends on the severity of the crime. Trump's are numerous and bad.
There is really very little comparison to be drawn between the Lagarde trial and the Le Pen trial. Both were found guilty, but one of them was convicted of a much more serious offence and was sentenced accordingly.The current President of the European Central Bank. Hypocrisy 101. View attachment 42301
Debs was charged in wartime for calling on people to resist the draft. Trump incited riots, in which police officers were killed, to prevent the transfer of power. Further, he threatened state officials to try to alter election results and had prepared fake elector slates with which he planned to hijack Biden’s election.So did Eugene Debs, hence why I asked you about him. So I’d like an answer please. Was it a disgrace that socialist Eugene Debs was allowed to run for president in 1920?
Or is it one rule for politicians you like and another for politicians you dislike?
I voted for Teddy Roosevelt 3 times mateYou’re never going to get a straight answer out of the renowned Eugene Debs fanboy BSB
The cognitive dissonance here is astounding. The point you make about Eugene Debs is the exact point the conservatives made when defending Trump.
The pertinent point here is that a convicted felon stood for president from their jail cell. Was that a disgrace? Yes or no. Forget the ideology of the subject or the severity of the crimes, the important fact is whether or not it is wrong for a convicted criminal to stand for president.
You have subtly moved the goalposts. Trump committed treason and tried to overthrow the legitimate election of his opponent. Debs campaigned against US participation in WW1.The cognitive dissonance here is astounding. The point you make about Eugene Debs is the exact point the conservatives made when defending Trump.
The pertinent point here is that a convicted felon stood for president from their jail cell. Was that a disgrace? Yes or no. Forget the ideology of the subject or the severity of the crimes, the important fact is whether or not it is wrong for a convicted criminal to stand for president.
They’re a bunch of opportunists though that don’t actually make any difference, apart from attack marginalised people.At least we can get rid of our revolving door of idiots and NPCs in government every so often!
Looking at all of the major economies in Europe, they’re all suffering from more or less the same issues; low growth, high tax burden, high immigration, increased crime, housing shortages and increasingly overwhelming public services.
The mainstream parties have been given the chances to fix this and have repeatedly failed, hence the rise of Meloni, AfD, National Rally and so on.
Who in Italy have they tried to stop running?'It's ok when we do it'.
Anyone genuinely criminal should be questioned whether they should hold these roles (there's so many of them), but it has to be applied across the board, and it isn't.
Brazil, Argentina, Romania, France, Italy, Germany, USA (I could name more) have all had people on the right that they've tried or have successfully tried to stop running 'in the name of democracy'.
When it goes the other way there is silence, or as we are seeing, and attempt to play down the offences of people on one side and not the other. The double standard is really frustrating and only fuels the campaigns more.
We have also seen that far from just criminal ‘illegals’, the Trump regime is now focusing on immigrants of all types. So people should be careful what they wish for.They’re a bunch of opportunists though that don’t actually make any difference, apart from attack marginalised people.
they hung that muesoliniWho in Italy have they tried to stop running?
Who in Italy have they tried to stop running?
they hung that muesolini
Sent to an Alpenitentiarythey hung that muesolini
You have subtly moved the goalposts. Trump committed treason and tried to overthrow the legitimate election of his opponent. Debs campaigned against US participation in WW1.
Is it Rogan or Tim Pool you’re getting the arguments from these days?
Lagarde's crime was negligence over the payment of €404m to a crony of Sarkosy for election support, Le Pen was held directly responsible for €474,000.There is really very little comparison to be drawn between the Lagarde trial and the Le Pen trial. Both were found guilty, but one of them was convicted of a much more serious offence and was sentenced accordingly.
I haven’t argued that a convict shouldn’t be able to stand for office, it’s what the convict did that matters.No, it’s a knowledge of US history and the US constitution because historical precedents and the law actually matter.
You’ve moved the goalposts because Trump hasn’t been convicted of treason, yet you keep referencing Jan 6th. Which, ironically, damaged Trump (and the election denialism) in the Republican primaries before the ‘legal fare’, hence the points about him being martyred. Besides, it’s irrelevant in the context of this conversation. Trump has also appealed the convictions he faced.
On the other hand, Eugene Debs was convicted under the Sedition Act (/Espionage Act). As principled as his position was and draconian the legislation was… it does not change the fact that he was a convicted felon and was able to stand in an election. Thats the operative question here, should a convicted felon be able to run for president? In all cases or none at all.
Your argument is that ‘x’ convicted felon should not be allowed to run for president, going as far to call it ‘disgrace’. This argument is fair enough in isolation. However, when presented with the only historical precedent of a convicted felon standing in a presidential election, the your argument loses its consistency. Why should it only apply to Trump but not Debs? My argument is that both should have been allowed to stand.
I chose the Eugene Debs example for a reason BSB. With genuine respect, it was obvious you weren’t going to denounce him and the hypocrisy was going to be on display for all to see. For what it’s worth, Eugene Debs was treated harshly and it’s a stain on US freedom of speech… however, facts are facts and he was a convicted felon by the laws of the land and he was not barred from standing election because the constitution does not prohibit it.
Those facts, whether you like it or not, applied to Trump because that’s what equality under the law means in practice.
I haven’t argued that a convict shouldn’t be able to stand for office, it’s what the convict did that matters.
I don’t consider what he did to be treasonous.To go back to the original question, was it a ‘disgrace’ for Eugene Debs to stand for president in 1920?
Despite the fact he was a convicted felon under the Sedition and Espionage Acts i.e. incitement to rebellion / treason.
I don’t consider what he did to be treasonous.
He hasn’t been convicted because he became the president.The US law isn’t based on your considerations. At the time, it was considered treasonous under the law. Therefore, applying your logic consistently, if treason disqualifies a candidate, that should apply to a politician you hold in high esteem.
In any case, Trump hasn’t been convicted of anything relating to treason. So your original point doesn’t even stand from a legal perspective.
He hasn’t been convicted because he became the president.
An astonishing statement. Presumably you just don’t think Trump did anything seriously wrong which is why you’ve had to dust off the history textbook and go to an election that took place 105 years ago to deflect from the fascist pig sitting in the White House today.The electorate are the ultimate judges and jurors.
An astonishing statement. Presumably you just don’t think Trump did anything seriously wrong which is why you’ve had to dust off the history textbook and go to an election that took place 105 years ago to deflect from the fascist pig sitting in the White House today.
The post was about children and ownership of smart phones and / or x-boxes. Are they essential? What services for children are being digitised by the government?Smart phones are hardly a luxury item in this day and age. You can't have a government on the one hand committed to digitising public services on the other claiming devices that are used to access them are luxury items.
I saw someone post that online when it came out. Took about 30 seconds to google and find out it was bollocks.Kemi Badenoch Repeats Adolescence Conspiracy Theory Denied By Its Creator
She claimed that the Netflix drama was based on a true story involving a non-white boy.www.huffingtonpost.co.uk
Lord knows what stuff she’s reading online…
Kemi Badenoch Repeats Adolescence Conspiracy Theory Denied By Its Creator
She claimed that the Netflix drama was based on a true story involving a non-white boy.www.huffingtonpost.co.uk
Lord knows what stuff she’s reading online…
You’ve gone off on a tangent on me. My only point was that legal action that took place strengthened Trump’s re-election, that is all. The polling among the US electorate was that they felt that there was a political motive in the timing of the court cases, whether or not it is true or not is academic. That was their perception of events and voted at the ballot box.
Given that Trump won the popular vote (first Republican to do so since 2004), as well as improving vote share with all social classes and ethnicities, the scale of the victory was astonishing.
Due process exists here. Everyone has a right to appeal and a lot of cases have been dropped so if the passage of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ applies…
Anyway, the original question of how he was ‘martyred’ has been answered sufficiently in my view.
Just as a bit of a reminder, the court cases were dropped when he became President, not because there was a change in the facts around them.
The post was about children and ownership of smart phones and / or x-boxes. Are they essential? What services for children are being digitised by the government?
Why does everything have to be so deep and people taking pleasure in looking at things in a way that they can be offended?Getting a bit bored of hearing about Adolescence hype now.
Yes, the misogyny is an issue as is social media but every day it's the media trying to ram it down throats.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?