Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 241: Trump Goes Coup-Coup

(+) Yeah! (+)

The primary frustration with the Guyger case is (or at least should be) that she is a cop, and is very obviously getting favorable treatment because of it. Whether you think she should've been sentenced harsher or her sentence should be the fairly applied standard is a debate you can have. But people are absolutely allowed to be frustrated with the system as it currently exists and how certain types of individual get favorable treatment because of it.

Anything beyond that is silly. This trial ended basically as it should have.

I think most people's problem is that Amber Guyger is getting way more sympathy than she deserves. She killed a man -- a man who was in his own home. Which she barged into. She doesn't deserve sympathy.
---

Dancedreamer posted...

I think most people's problem is that Amber Guyger is getting way more sympathy than she deserves. She killed a man -- a man who was in his own home. Which she barged into. She doesn't deserve sympathy.

Best time to give it if you were wronged.
---

https://twitter.com/mviser/status/1179767604065505280?s=21

President Trump, on the South Lawn, says Ukraine "should investigate the Bidens." "I would say President Zelenskiy, if it was me, I would recommend they start an investigation into the Bidens.

"Likewise," he added, "China should investigate the Bidens."

Hes making this so easy
---

Dancedreamer posted...

I think most people's problem is that Amber Guyger is getting way more sympathy than she deserves. She killed a man -- a man who was in his own home. Which she barged into. She doesn't deserve sympathy.

Do you think her being a cop has to do with that sympathy?

Reg posted...

Do you think her being a cop has to do with that sympathy?

I don't think her being a cop is why the jury and the brother showed her sympathy.

I think this is a case where everyone directly involved actually feels like it was an accident but that there had to be a punishment.

---

Reg posted...

The primary frustration with the Guyger case is (or at least should be) that she is a cop, and is very obviously getting favorable treatment because of it. Whether you think she should've been sentenced harsher or her sentence should be the fairly applied standard is a debate you can have. But people are absolutely allowed to be frustrated with the system as it currently exists and how certain types of individual get favorable treatment because of it.

Anything beyond that is silly. This trial ended basically as it should have.

Yeah, well said. This case existing alongside other cases where the standard of fairness is not applied is what is frustrating. The Crystal Mason case is one I see brought up a lot, because both are in Texas.

https://www.texasobserver.org/the-casualties-of-texas-war-on-voter-fraud/

5 years in prison for a felon on probation attempting to vote, but she had used a provisional ballot designed for the exact purpose of letting people unsure of voting status to attempt to. The ballot of course was thrown out so she didn't even actually vote! Still convicted and pending appeal.

---

Reg posted...

Do you think her being a cop has to do with that sympathy?

Yes, and white. You can bet Cyntoia Brown never received a hug from the judge when she was sentenced to life in prison at 16 for killing the man who bought her for sex.
---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

The Crystal Mason case is one I see brought up a lot, because both are in Texas.

Neighboring counties too.

That case is far more bullshit than anything about this one tbh

Dancedreamer posted...

Reg posted...

Do you think her being a cop has to do with that sympathy?

Yes, and white. You can bet Cyntoia Brown never received a hug from the judge when she was sentenced to life in prison at 16 for killing the man who bought her for sex.

Then you see the point I was making. Her being a cop is absolutely the distinguishing factor in all of this (white woman also helps, as you pointed out, but I don't believe it was nearly as much of a factor as her job), when it should not be. And that double standard, both in the system itself and in public perception, is what bothers me, and why I was pleasantly surprised by the verdict

If the situation was reversed, if the same guy was legally carrying and went into the wrong apartment and murdered a cop, he'd get somewhere closer to 25 to life, I have no doubt.

That being said, I'm not for long prison sentences.

The thing that makes it gross imo is the sympathy towards someone who intentionally shot someone. In my eyes, she's done nothing to deserve it, especially when you saw those text messages where she admitted to being racist.
---

Yeah the takeaway shouldnt be she deserves more punishment, it should be everyone deserves less punishment
---

I don't think she deserves more punishment, but I do think that the Judge showing her sympathy comes across as a bit improper. The victim's brother? Fine. But the judge, just doesn't make sense to me. Doesn't seem like it should be her place.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

If the situation was reversed, if the same guy was legally carrying and went into the wrong apartment and murdered a cop, he'd get somewhere closer to 25 to life, I have no doubt.

Don't even have to fully reverse it. An ordinary guy walking into the wrong apartment and killing a non-cop would certainly get more than 10 years.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

That being said, I'm not for long prison sentences.

The thing that makes it gross imo is the sympathy towards someone who intentionally shot and someone. In my eyes, she's done nothing to deserve it, especially when you saw those text messages where she admitted to being racist

Generally agree with the first of these, strongly agree with the second.

Once she said she entered the apartment intending to kill him, regardless of whether she honestly thought it was her apartment or not, that's where she lost any claim to sympathy (and certainly why she got a murder conviction)

Jakyl25 posted...

Yeah the takeaway shouldnt be she deserves more punishment, it should be everyone deserves less punishment

Absolutely agree with this.

Corrik7 posted...

kevwaffles posted...

You're talking about replies to celebrities on Twitter and Resetera. Not exactly known to be collections of humanity's finest.

I am making fun of the dregs of your spectrum as you do ours.

First, me personally? Lol.

Second, when people in this topic make fun of "the dregs of your spectrum", it tends to either be shit journalistic sources, ones you often quote mind you, or communites that have a clear political stance/agenda.

Third, when Twitter comments do come up, they're at least more in direct relation to a news story than people shit-talking a celebrity for any reason they can. Because that's a thing shitty people do. (Also trends with bots, but that's pretty much a whole different subject).

In summary, if you wanna hang out on Resetera to watch shitty people be shitty people, you do that. If you're gonna bring it up here as the "same thing the other side does", that really says more about you than anyone else.
---

kevwaffles posted...

First, me personally? Lol.

Second, when people in this topic make fun of "the dregs of your spectrum", it tends to either be shit journalistic sources, ones you often quote mind you, or communites that have a clear political stance/agenda.

Third, when Twitter comments do come up, they're at least more in direct relation to a news story than people shit-talking a celebrity for any reason they can. Because that's a thing shitty people do. (Also trends with bots, but that's pretty much a whole different subject).

In summary, if you wanna hang out on Resetera to watch shitty people be shitty people, you do that. If you're gonna bring it up here as the "same thing the other side does", that really says more about you than anyone else.

Actually, the dregs of the spectrums are pretty widely prevalent nowadays with how divisive the country has become. I always visit resetera for mostly video game news and usually to dabble on some threads on the regular. Always nice to see what liberals think about things, as well as conservatives, to see both sides. Resetera does go down the rabbit hole with insanity at times which is funny as well.


---

Jakyl25 posted...

Yeah the takeaway shouldnt be she deserves more punishment, it should be everyone deserves less punishment

This definitely sums it up.

When should avoid applying unnecessary whataboutisms. We seem to are that "murder" as opposed to "manslaughter" was correct given the circumstances. Now 10 years seems okay when you consider the murder appears to have been based on accidental circumstances.

Bringing up different, unrelated, events where things worked out less fairly doesn't really contribute anything meaningful to this instance. Yes, this case does not exist in a vacuum, but we should take what happened as a win and argue that this sort of outcome should be allowed more often rather than being the exception.

At least that's how I feel.

---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

This definitely sums it up.

When should avoid applying unnecessary whataboutisms. We seem to are that "murder" as opposed to "manslaughter" was correct given the circumstances. Now 10 years seems okay when you consider the murder appears to have been based on accidental circumstances.

Bringing up different, unrelated, events where things worked out less fairly doesn't really contribute anything meaningful to this instance. Yes, this case does not exist in a vacuum, but we should take what happened as a win and argue that this sort of outcome should be allowed more often rather than being the exception.

At least that's how I feel.

Problem with a lot of people arguing how other people got more is that they tend to have other crimes and priors and stuff that cause the higher sentences, but the context isn't conveyed when expressing the outrage and injustice.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Problem with a lot of people arguing how other people got more is that they tend to have other crimes and priors and stuff that cause the higher sentences, but the context isn't conveyed when expressing the outrage and injustice.

You have to admit there are legitimate instances of Injustice and over sentencing that have occurred and are not at all in keeping with what we saw in this case. This should not be discounted of have because sometimes context was not applied.

But the outlook should be a glass half full approach of "the system worked in this instance, let's try to get to a place where the system working feels like the norm, rather than the exception".

---

Reg posted...

Don't even have to fully reverse it. An ordinary guy walking into the wrong apartment and killing a non-cop would certainly get more than 10 years.

I wouldn't be so sure.

I actually know of a similar case a couple decades back in Iowa City. A college kid got drunk and went into the wrong apartment, then beat the elderly owner to death because he thought it was a burglar. I don't remember the exact sentence but it couldn't have been much more than 10 years, if it was even that much, because he was a guest speaker at my youth group and was in his 30s at the time.
---

muddersmilk posted...

Reg posted...

Don't even have to fully reverse it. An ordinary guy walking into the wrong apartment and killing a non-cop would certainly get more than 10 years.

I wouldn't be so sure.

I actually know of a similar case a couple decades back in Iowa City. A college kid got drunk and went into the wrong apartment, then beat the elderly owner to death because he thought it was a burglar. I don't remember the exact sentence but it couldn't have been much more than 10 years, if it was even that much, because he was a guest speaker at my youth group and was in his 30s at the time.

I googled it. His name is Curtis Fry, and it was on his 21st birthday. He was also blackout drunk and doesn't remember a thing, but apparently fully copped to everything as soon as he sobered up enough to realize what happened.
---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

You have to admit there are legitimate instances of Injustice and over sentencing that have occurred and are not at all in keeping with what we saw in this case. This should not be discounted of have because sometimes context was not applied.

But the outlook should be a glass half full approach of "the system worked in this instance, let's try to get to a place where the system working feels like the norm, rather than the exception".

I am sure there are bad rulings and mistakes. The problem is that consistently outrage is poured over out of context rulings and stuff that they usually get lost when the legit ones are complained about.


---

https://qctimes.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/the-big-story-from-athlete-to-convict/article_1b9d2597-8731-54da-8163-5fe14595d7f0.html

Interesting.

---

This is why the muddersmilk posted...

Reg posted...

Don't even have to fully reverse it. An ordinary guy walking into the wrong apartment and killing a non-cop would certainly get more than 10 years.

I wouldn't be so sure.

I actually know of a similar case a couple decades back in Iowa City. A college kid got drunk and went into the wrong apartment, then beat the elderly owner to death because he thought it was a burglar. I don't remember the exact sentence but it couldn't have been much more than 10 years, if it was even that much, because he was a guest speaker at my youth group and was in his 30s at the time.

This is why the Castle Doctrine is a stupid idea. Homeowners shouldn't have carte blanche to kill anyone in their home, even if it is a burglar.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

muddersmilk posted...

Reg posted...

Don't even have to fully reverse it. An ordinary guy walking into the wrong apartment and killing a non-cop would certainly get more than 10 years.

I wouldn't be so sure.

I actually know of a similar case a couple decades back in Iowa City. A college kid got drunk and went into the wrong apartment, then beat the elderly owner to death because he thought it was a burglar. I don't remember the exact sentence but it couldn't have been much more than 10 years, if it was even that much, because he was a guest speaker at my youth group and was in his 30s at the time.

I googled it. His name is Curtis Fry, and it was on his 21st birthday. He was also blackout drunk and doesn't remember a thing, but apparently fully copped to everything as soon as he sobered up enough to realize what happened.

Huh

I stand corrected then. It doesn't clear up the nationwide attention this case got, the sympathy for Guyger, etc, but it gives me a bit more hope for the system

Jakyl25 posted...

https://twitter.com/mviser/status/1179767604065505280?s=21

Hes making this so easy

Add it to the articles of impeachment

Of course, peoples minds seem to short circuit when wrongdoing is done in the open, so Im not sure this one will have the impact on public opinion that it should.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Add it to the articles of impeachment

Of course, peoples minds seem to short circuit when wrongdoing is done in the open, so Im not sure this one will have the impact on public opinion that it should.

Yeah this just seems like "Russia, if you're listening..." part 2. Well, probably more than part 2, honestly. But that wasn't a big enough red flag for people so of course he'll try it some more.

---

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1179502966606352386

It appears that Trump has been DMCA'd by Nickleback

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

muddersmilk posted...

Reg posted...

Don't even have to fully reverse it. An ordinary guy walking into the wrong apartment and killing a non-cop would certainly get more than 10 years.

I wouldn't be so sure.

I actually know of a similar case a couple decades back in Iowa City. A college kid got drunk and went into the wrong apartment, then beat the elderly owner to death because he thought it was a burglar. I don't remember the exact sentence but it couldn't have been much more than 10 years, if it was even that much, because he was a guest speaker at my youth group and was in his 30s at the time.

I googled it. His name is Curtis Fry, and it was on his 21st birthday. He was also blackout drunk and doesn't remember a thing, but apparently fully copped to everything as soon as he sobered up enough to realize what happened.

Yep that's him! Thank you for finding it cause I couldn't remember his name to find it quickly.
---

That was a classic example of fair use. I'm sure the most litigious president in history will be taking this to court where he will win.0
---

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/top-diplomat-ukraine-crazy-withhold-security-sasistance-political/story?id=66039011

In newly disclosed text messages shared with Congress, the top U.S. diplomat to Ukraine at the time writes to a group of other American diplomats that "I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign.

The texts came just days before the White House released the military assistance to Ukraine -- almost $400 million from the State Department and Pentagon meant to boost the U.S. partner against Russian aggression.

---

The smoking gun just got a lot smokier.
---

Meanwhile, Trump's fury at teenage girl has still not subsided.

Pelosis response to Kevin McCarthy calling for an end to the impeachment inquiry:
https://twitter.com/steventdennis/status/1179842989499326465?s=21

---

Also, in case you guys havent heard of the latest Jacob Wohl scam... he now has a 24 year old marine claiming that he had an affair with Elizabeth Warren. It will not surprise you its looking like a lie!

https://twitter.com/brandyzadrozny/status/1179833719902760960?s=21

---

Also lmao this Warren tweet which I very much hope is a Wohl subtweet:

https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1179851099978846209?s=21

---

the most impressive thing is how fast Wohl's scams are debunked

I think one of his cons got exposed before he even made his bullshit claim publicly
---

https://twitter.com/rebeccaballhaus/status/1179867276633411584

NEW: Trump ordered the removal of the ambassador to Ukraine after months of complaints from allies, including Rudy Giuliani, that she was undermining him abroad and obstructing efforts to persuade Kyiv to investigate Biden.

---

China update:

https://twitter.com/jonfavs/status/1179891683950919680?s=21

---

If I were Joe Biden, I'd stay away from China. Wouldn't want to get arrested and put on trial for corruption there. Xi Jinping has, of course, been doing a corruption crackdown for years, along with consolidating his own power.
---

Although, I suppose China has an informal rule that any former President of China cannot be charged with wrongdoing. This precedent allows each leader to feel safe that he won't be prosecuted by his successor. Not sure it would protect a former US Vice President though.
---

Guessing the reason China came up publicly earlier today was the administration trying to get ahead of this when CNN reached out for comment.

the whole "it doesn't count if you do it in the open" thing
---

Really good article from George Conway about Trump's fundamental unfitness for office:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/george-conway-trump-unfit-office/599128/

---

Avalanche of news keeps on coming:

https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1179896752167628800

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Really good article from George Conway about Trump's fundamental unfitness for office:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/george-conway-trump-unfit-office/599128/

Basically, he says that Trump is not capable of telling the truth because he does not comprehend the concept of truth. But if that is true, then by definition Trump is not lying. He cannot lie if he cannot understand the difference between truth and falsehood.

Now the question for the voters is, is understanding of the concepts of truth and falsehood an important characteristic in a president? I think the voters have answered that question. And the answer is no.
---

The George Costanza defense!

"Remember Jerry... it's not a lie if you believe it."

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

The George Costanza defense!

"Remember Jerry... it's not a lie if you believe it."

Ain't it the truth.
---

But Trump has really taken it one step farther. It takes a lot of work to only say things you believe. You might have to change your beliefs to match what you want to say. That's difficult and risky. Trump's method, to disbelieve in the very concept of truth itself, eliminates in one blow all possibility of ever lying, with no need for any further work.

Few people are able to achieve such transcendent mastery.
---

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/10/03/politics/trump-biden-call-xi-secure-server/index.html?__twitter_impression=true

During a phone call with Xi on June 18, Trump raised Biden's political prospects as well as those of Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who by then had started rising in the polls, according to two people familiar with the discussion. In that call, Trump also told Xi he would remain quiet on Hong Kong protests as trade talks progressed.

Okay guess we need this call too
---

Oh so I guess it doesn't have to deal with Hunter after all. Who knew!
---