Nevertheless, he added, “the judge gave him a max sentence, claiming it was ‘a moral imperative’ to punish him as harshly as possible.”
This guy gets fried on ‘mOrAL iMpeRaTivE’ — but Trump and Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh continue to party on— while making a complete mockery of the ever apparent 2-tiered US justice system.
In a bourgeois state, the laws are for the little people.
It annoys me to no end that real-life whistleblowers end up in jail, have to emmigrate or die under mysterious circumstances, but fictional whistleblowers are cheered on in theatres and novels.
It’s like America has a severe case of cognitive dissonance that the world sees, but is happy to stay that way no matter the cost.
Real life whistleblowers don’t have a full team of Hollywood PR professionals boosting their image.
The closest we came to a real whistleblower celebrity was Edward Snowden. And when he left Hong Kong for Russia, all the liberals who thought he was a based freedom fighting chad decided oops nah, Big Russia Foreign Agent disregard everything about that PRISM shit.
I just learned: In ancient times the government paid money to their citizens to get their fellowship. Only conquered countries had to pay taxes.
And in ancient times in Mesopotamia, there have been quite regular debt reset events. All private debts got null. Commercial debts still were valid.
I‘m currently reading „Debt“ by David Graeber. Interesting to read how religion, money, guilt and debt are intertwined. How we are forced into the rat race by burden us with debts - with both, moral and financial debts.
Only conquered countries had to pay taxes.
“Debt: The First 5000 Years” is such a good book because it really exposes the dynamics of conquest.
Conquered countries had to pay taxes in the coin of the realm. Coin was paid to the soldiers occupying the country. So in order to pay taxes, you were obligated to do business with the occupying soldiery. This system very quickly sorted the folks willing to accept conquest from the folks intent on rebellion, and it had a secondary benefit of enriching the defectors.
The conception of currency as a means of delimiting who is and is not a part of your society is really a genius bit of social engineering.
WOW, WSJ are scumbags!
Can’t believe a Rupert Murdoch owned publication would do this
Biden if you were looking for a chance to prove you’re about reform and equality for working classes, now is your chance to pardon this guy and give him a position in department of treasurey.
It will never happen. Biden is owned by the same people as Trump. There’s only one party, the party of the Oligarchs. All of the petty shit about abortion, trans rights, gay rights, racial equality, gender equality, religion, second amendment, etcetera are all distractions to keep us all at each others throats while the rich cocksuckers figure out more insidious ways to fuck us all over.
This sounds a lot like the one party “they’re all the same” bullshit that right wingers like to propogate.
Because make no mistake, one party is at least trying to push laws through that help (democrats), versus the other which just openly fucks people and doesn’t give a shit about helping out.
44 Democrat senators, 36 Republicans and Joe Biden all worked together to pass a law forcing a union to accept a contract it’s members had already voted on and rejected.
Fuck all of them.
Wow. Thanks for cherry picking one thing out of hundreds to show your point! That’s a solid way of arguing.
Would you like me to cherry pick an example of one which disproves you? Or would you like to examine the evidence as a whole and actually properly examine it?
Disproves which part of what he wrote?
Or disproves the strawman you set up yourself?
Let me explain it to you since you don’t seem to understand.
OP makes a statement that all democrats and republicans act the same and are equal.
I say no, that’s not right.
Other poster says well if you look at this one example, they voted together!
I said looking at one example isn’t reflective of the whole picture. That I can just pick another example that shows they don’t vote together. You need to look at it overall instead of cherypicking facts that suit you.
Do you understand the logic there and why what you wrote makes no sense?
I can make it simpler perhaps if you need it.
OP makes a statement that all democrats and republicans act the same and are equal
Wrong. OP never wrote that - YOU made that statement as a strawman. You should try to be a more honest person.
Biden if you were looking for a chance to prove you’re about reform and equality for working classes
No. Shut up. Sit down. If you don’t vote for Biden, then you ain’t working class, Jack.
