Political Differential Law Enforcement = Witch Hunt

Jump to Last Post 1-9 of 9 discussions (94 posts)

85
Sharlee01posted 18 months ago

Elon Musk

@elonmusk
Subscriber
"There does seem to be far higher interest in pursuing Trump compared to other people in politics.

Very important that the justice system rebut what appears to be differential enforcement or they will lose public trust."
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/166 … han-others

Your thoughts ----

I see it as Elon sees it, and I am one that has totally lost trust in our current government, and most of its agencies.
reply report
1. 80
  Credence2posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Trump willfully broke the law, and will suffer the consequences having nothing to do with politics...
  
  DIDN'T BIDEN AND FORMER VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE HAVE CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS, TOO?
  
  Yes, but the circumstances of their cases are vastly different from those involving Trump.
  
  After classified documents were found at Biden's think tank and Pence's Indiana home, their lawyers notified authorities and quickly arranged for them to be handed over. They also authorized other searches by federal authorities to search for additional documents.
  
  There is no indication either was aware of the existence of the records before they were found, and no evidence has so far emerged that Biden or Pence sought to conceal the discoveries. That’s important because the Justice Department historically looks for willfulness in deciding whether to bring criminal charges.
  
  A special counsel was appointed earlier this year to probe how classified materials ended up at Biden’s Delaware home and former office. But even if the Justice Department were to find Biden’s case prosecutable on the evidence, its Office of Legal Counsel has concluded that a president is immune from prosecution during his time in office.
  
  As for Pence, the Justice Department informed his legal team earlier this month that it would not be pursuing criminal charges against him over his handling of the documents.
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Cred
  "Trump willfully broke the law, and will suffer the consequences having nothing to do with politics... "Innocent until found guilty.
  
  "After classified documents were found at Biden's think tank and Pence's Indiana home, their lawyers notified authorities and quickly arranged for them to be handed over. They also authorized other searches by federal authorities to search for additional documents."
  
  Both VP did have documents for a very long time, both kept the records in insecure places. And we have no idea if either would return them if the Trump matter did not occur. Both clearly broke laws.
  
  It was illegal for a VP to take top secret documents out of a security and keep them period. No "well, I forgot", ignorance is not considered when breaking our laws.
  Presidential Records Act (PRA) of 1978 clearly offers facts to support my comment. https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/358 … ost4296300
  
  I believe " Elon" was pointing out that 'other politicians" is being treated much differently than Trump, and could work to create public distrust in our Federal law enforcement agencies.
  
  Musk --- "There does seem to be a far higher interest in pursuing Trump compared to other people in politics.
  
  Very important that the justice system rebut what appears to be differential enforcement or they will lose public trust."
  
  I see Elon's point.
  reply report
  99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Did you forget about Joe leaving a few boxes of classified documents in the garage with his car? If Trump is to be prosecuted what about Biden?
  reply report
  80
  Credence2posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Was it willful or did Biden resist when confronted with documents, did Pence?
  
  Let's not be silly, Trump was egregious in this matter the way others have not been...
  
  Harry Houdini will have nothing on Trump if he can get out of this one.
  
  MAGAT hats will always support him regardless, but independents and moderates may have a problem voting for a man with so many indictments behind his name. He's through......
  
  Doc, While I regret to have to use the Huffington Post, take the time to look at the specific differences between the situation with Trump as compared with Clinton, Pence or Biden?
  
  https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-cl … eb910f0fb5
  reply report
  99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  You think that Trump is at fault but what the rest of the world sees is a corrupt vice president without any legal authority misplacing classified documents and making them available to his corrupt famíly. Not sure how anyone that supports the idea of the rule of law could support such corruption.
  reply report
  80
  Credence2posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  The rest of the world? Where do you get that Doc? Can you support that broad brush? You really mean just "rightwing" fanatics who are to be dismissed out of hand.
  
  Biden will be investigated just as Pence is and Clinton was. But right now, your "boy wonder" has got his cajoles in wringer...
  reply report
  99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  First, Trump is not MY boy Wonder. He has made many mistakes as president but not as many as people like Jimmy Carter or Biden.
  Second, even a liberal MSM site like Pew reports that worldwide confidence levels in Biden fell significantly from 2021to 2022. Unfortunately newer numbers are not available but I am sure they are going to be a lot lower.
  reply report
  80
  Credence2posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  "what the rest of the world sees is a corrupt vice president without any legal authority misplacing classified documents and making them available to his corrupt family"
  
  Mistakes? That is a matter or opinion. If world wide confidence levels are falling in regards to the Biden administration, is it because of the fact that Trump was indicted? This deflection on your part has fallen flat.
  
  You will need to document what you have already said for the sake of credibility.
  reply report
  99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Document what? That he took documents and put them in his garage? You Will have to look to your law enforcement agencies for that.
  reply report
  54
  JimMoodieInVirginiaposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  88
  wildernessposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  If that is the difference, why is he charged with having the documents? All three had them but only one was charged with that crime.
  reply report
  80
  Credence2posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Life is not always that simple, Wilderness.
  
  There is first degree, second degree and manslaughter categories of murder, but are all the same in the eyes of the law?
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Not sure if this will hurt Trump's polls. Social media shows he has lots of support. Many feel once again that the witch hunt is on. It will really be interesting to see what Trump ops to do --- speedy trial or drag on until after the election.
  
  One thing is for sure, this man has proven Dems drummed up all the other witch hunts. Will this be the case with these indictments?
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  He has a vast problem --- I am interested in viewing upcoming polls. It will shed light on what Americans feel about him facing serious problems.
  
  I mean at this point we can only judge what people are saying on social media. Lots of back and forths on this issue.
  reply report
  73
  Kathleen Cochranposted 16 months agoin reply to this
  Polls are not evidence. The difference is the evidence. It doesn't change just because some people don't like it.
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  "Was it willful or did Biden resist when confronted with documents, did Pence? "
  The timeline shows Trump cooperated from the very day the Boxes were delivered to his home in Florida.
  https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-indi … -timeline/
  
  Jan 2921 --- Jan. 14: Six days before the presidential transition, movers are photographed wheeling boxes out of the White House complex and placing them on nearby trucks.
  Jan. 18: CBS Miami reports moving trucks are observed at Mar-a-Lago.
  Jan. 19: Trump tells the Archives that he has designated Mark Meadows, Pat Cipollone, Pat Philbin, Scott Gast, Steven Engel and Michael Purpura, who served in his administration either within the White House or Justice Department, as his representatives to handle matters pertaining to records from his presidency.
  
  The timeline shows Trump was retrieving documents and sending them as the Archives asked. By the time of the FBI raid he had sent the archives 30 boxes, Please follow the timeline, and I think you may see he was cooperating from the day he received the boxes.
  
  I don't think the indictment concentrates on his cooperation, there are much more serious charges in regard to what is being accused.
  
  The charges are about withholding certain documents, the said seriousness of the documents they accuse him of keeping, and what he is accused of doing with the said documents.
  
  I can see Doc's point, we just do not know anything about the documents that Pensee and Biden had in their possession. We have no idea what the documents pertained to. Just because they gave them back ( I must add Biden had the documents for close to a decade. We have no idea what he was doing with them. We have a right to know, he deserves the same treatment the law offered Trump. I realize that Biden has a Special concern investigating the document he took and kept. Perhaps we should cool our jets and not condemn any of these men. Trump is innocent until found guilty. It's very clear a grand jury voted to indict.
  
  Biden is innocent until proven guilty. However, I think Elon's statement holds good reasoning.
  
  I hope you will take time and look at the timeline in regard to how Trump appeared to cooperate to some extent with the archives. He is facing far more serious charges.
  reply report
  54
  JimMoodieInVirginiaposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  85
  Sharlee01posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Yes, that is my reasoning for my comment "He is facing far more serious charges."
  
  However, has all you mentioned been actually proven as truth or is it once again the media offering their leaks, their contacts? Have we not learned that much of what media reported in regard to Russia Russia Russia, as well as the Hunter Boden laptop, etc... come out in the end as not being true. I think it is just better to play the waiting game and see what pans out in the trial. When under oath some may very well change their tone.
  
  I know many have waited to feast on trumps flesh --- but have we not been down this very path before?
  
  I am working on carefully reading the indictment. So, not saying much in regard to witnesses. I have noted many accusations that include Trump involving others. I must remind you all the General allegations mentioned in the lengthy indictment will need to be proven firsthand in court. No hearsay will be allowed.
  reply report
  54
  JimMoodieInVirginiaposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  85
  Sharlee01posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Yes, we do know a grand jury's info did not leak. However, we are seeing a ton of leaking now. It is clear that the GJ was compelled to indict. I certainly can't argue that point. However, we have heard one side --- do you feel it is important to hear Trump's side? Or should we just hang him high?
  
  Gosh, I think all the points you have offered in your comments are compelling. I pride myself in not condemning before I hear the other side. I am a bit different, and don't join in group thinking. I realize this is not today the norm.
  reply report
  54
  JimMoodieInVirginiaposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  85
  Sharlee01posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  I feel the media right and left are very destructive. The bottom line, the investigation lasted about a year, a Grand Jury came to believe Trump broke several laws after hearing and seeing the evidence. Now it's up to the court, and a jury of his peers to hear both sides. That's where we are.
  
  I am just about done reading the long confusing indictment. I tend to like to look at facts, like documents, stats, and firsthand information.
  
  The indictment has serious assertions, if these assertions can be proven, Trump will be found guilty.
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Your first three words say it all "According to the indictment".
  
  And we have heard all of what you offered in the media, as well as the actual Indictment document.
  
  What is left out, is Trump's side. It would seem we will need to wait for the court to offer him his chance to defend the allegations.
  
  The document is a Narrative inditement, these kinds of indictments are written like a book. It offers a "story" laid out to give a simple narrative of what occurred. It is interesting "Smith" used this form to lay out the charges, almost like it was prepared for media consumption.
  
  This sticks out to me after reading the indictment. It was hard to put down.
  I found one area that I feel will give Trump trouble (If they have witnesses to back this claim) the charge that tells of Trump showing classified military documents to a writer, publisher, and two aids, none of which had security clearance. I think all the rest will be very defendable.
  
  Trump should have just given all the documents back period.
  reply report
  88
  wildernessposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  I can agree with your last statement. Trump had no possible use for those documents any more than the others did, and he not only should never have taken them he should have returned them as soon as he knew about them.
  reply report
  99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Yes, but neither should have the former vice president Biden taken documents and put them in his garage. If they are going to go after Trump that person should be indicted and prosecuted for the same reason.
  reply report
  54
  JimMoodieInVirginiaposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  No Faye I have not.Trump could NOT have avoided this political issue since your tribe has had a witch hunt against him since he was elected. You all will find anything to attack the man, even if it was not true like the "Russian collusion" propaganda that they started and shoved down the liberal throats.
  
  Biden took classified documents and put them in his garage. Even people in his party admit that this is true.Why dont you try stop accepting all of the lies that MSNBC are feeding you and think for yourself?
  reply report
  54
  JimMoodieInVirginiaposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  I am sure you and MNBC would not like that response but that does not mean it is not true.
  
  The witch hunt started in 2016 when Trump was elected and the Hillary Clinton minions declared that there was election fraud and they would see him impeached. If you do not understand that you have not been following US history.
  
  I am sure you do not understand the grand jury process or are making that comment just to be argumentative. The grand jury does not allow any defense of charges. The prosecutor presents what he thinks to the jury and asks them to indict a person. The prosecutor presents documents that he thinks will lead to an indictment. They are certainly not guilty at that point.
  
  If you think that a grand jury indictment means that a person has commited a crime it indicates a severe deficiency in knowledge of the justice system. Grand juries issue an indictment anywhere from 95 to 99% of the time. https://www.pooleshaffery.com/news/2014 … ry-system/
  report
  54
  JimMoodieInVirginiaposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  You said " It's obvious you don't understand the grand jury process either." Your comment about it being in his back yard indicates that you do not understand the grand jury process. Grand jurie ALMOST ALWAYS think that the prosecutor presented enough information because the defense is not even allowed into the room. I included a link but if you are not going to bother learning a little bit there is nothing I can do to help you here.
  report
  54
  JimMoodieInVirginiaposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  The grand jury rarely rejects anything since they are only given facts presented by the politically obsessed prosecutor. In Florida only needs about 12 votes from the 16 to 20 jurors, so even if there were a few MAGA people present (which you assume) I am sure that half of them supported MAGGOT Joe and the HRC witch hunt.
  https://gallardolawyers.com/criminal/gr … y-in-miami
  report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Plus a Grand jury hears one side of any case. The prosecution's side.
  report
  73
  Kathleen Cochranposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Biden immediately returned to documents.
  
  Trump didn't even when subpoenaed.
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  I think the obvious is a question many of us are asking --- And I am sure you may not want to face this question.
  
  Why did he take them? Why did he not return them in a more timely manner? I think it is crucial to know at this point, what the document Biden took pertain to.
  
  The DOJ dropped the investigation on Pence, due to being satisfied there was no intent of wrongdoing. We need to wait and see what the special counsel Hur comes up with in regard to the documents Biden had.
  reply report
  72
  Miebakagh57posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Why do certain guys fail to note that Trump, was co-operating with the Establishments, when ask to? And he certainly does. Pretending to be ignorant will not execuse any idiots here.
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 17 months agoin reply to this
  Well, all I can do is provide what facts I have found that clearly show Trump did cooperate with the Archives. The timeline shows this, as well as the fact Trump did send the Archives 15 boxes twice -- 30 boxes. This is ignored by anyone that wants to ignore this fact.
  
  A timeline also proves good proof of immediate cooperation on Trump's part.
  
  The timeline --
  
  2021
  Jan. 14: Six days before the presidential transition, movers are photographed wheeling boxes out of the White House complex and placing them on nearby trucks.
  
  Jan. 18: CBS Miami reports moving trucks are observed at Mar-a-Lago.
  
  Jan. 19: Trump tells the Archives that he has designated Mark Meadows, Pat Cipollone, Pat Philbin, Scott Gast, Steven Engel and Michael Purpura, who served in his administration either within the White House or Justice Department, as his representatives to handle matters pertaining to records from his presidency."
  
  This certainly indicates Trump contacted the Archives immediately in regard to the Documents.
  
  It is very obvious that Trump's attornies did not work with good speed, but did appear to be in contact with the archives, and did retrieve 30 boxes of documents they requested,
  
  I don't feel it is accurate to say (as many do) that Trump was not cooperation. There is good evidence he did.
  
  https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-indi … -timeline/
  
  This link is interesting and gives facts that will be important in Trump's trial.
  https://www.archives.gov/files/foia/bri … %20PRA.pdf
  reply report
  73
  Kathleen Cochranposted 16 months agoin reply to this
  Mie: " Trump, was co-operating with the Establishments, when ask to? And he certainly does. "
  
  I think your sources of information may be failing you on this issue.
  reply report
  72
  Miebakagh57posted 16 months agoin reply to this
  Okan. Can I see the correct source of INFORMATION that Trump was not co-operating?
  reply report
  73
  Kathleen Cochranposted 17 months agoin reply to this
  He apparently needed somewhere to pack his golf shirts.
  
  "Why did he take them? " Is "oh, he had a reason" an excuse for breaking the law?
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 17 months agoin reply to this
  I think if you would have followed this conversation you may have understood my comment --- I was referring to Biden, and questions I would like answered.
  
  "KATHLEEN COCHRAN WROTE:
  Biden immediately returned to documents.
  
  Trump didn't even when subpoenaed."
  
  My reply ---- I think the obvious is a question many of us are asking --- And I am sure you may not want to face this question.
  
  Why did he take them? Why did he not return them in a more timely manner? I think it is crucial to know at this point, what the document Biden took pertain to.
  
  The DOJ dropped the investigation on Pence, due to being satisfied there was no intent of wrongdoing. We need to wait and see what the special counsel Hur comes up with in regard to the documents Biden had.
  reply report
  81
  peterstreepposted 17 months agoin reply to this
  Why did he take them?
  This question is asking for speculation.
  My speculation is that he wanted to use the papers to blackmail foreign highly positioned people to get some business done. Just like Trump was blackmailed by Vladimir Putin using photos of him with an escort girl doing all kinds of things. But of course that is speculation too!
  
  The fact is that he took them and didn't want to return them when subpoenaed
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 17 months agoin reply to this
  I think you covered this subject very well.
  
  We just don't have answers as of yet. As we really don't have the answers as to why Trump took documents, or what was in his mind to use or not use them for.
  reply report
  81
  peterstreepposted 17 months agoin reply to this
  haha, sorry it wasn't my intention.
  I think at the moment it's just speculation of why he took the documents.
  Who can tell?
  No, we don't have the answers. I guess bit by bit during the court process we will hear more about it.
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 17 months agoin reply to this
  We just don't have enough info on why either took and kept documents. We do factually know they both did just that. I can't overlook that fact or make any excuse for either.
  reply report
  81
  peterstreepposted 17 months agoin reply to this
  No. you can't. but you should see each case separately.
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 17 months agoin reply to this
  That is very true. Both of the cases in question were very different. That subject opens a new can of worms.
  report
  73
  Kathleen Cochranposted 17 months agoin reply to this
  "I think if you would have followed this conversation you may have understood my comment."
  
  I read and understood.
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 17 months agoin reply to this
  It did not appear you read my comment due to your response.
  
  In my comment, I was clearly referring to Biden, and my questions were about Biden.
  Your response was clear in regard to Trump. " He apparently needed somewhere to pack his golf shirts. "Why did he take them? " Is "oh, he had a reason" an excuse for breaking
  the law?"
  
  I had hoped anyone responding to my post would have answered my question. --- "Why did he take them? Why did he not return them in a more timely manner? I think it is crucial to know at this point, what the document Biden took pertain to."
  
  Did you feel uncomfortable answering the questions about Biden? Is this why you deflected? I can understand at this point the issue of Biden taking documents and keeping them in three unsecured places would be difficult to defend. But why not answer the questions instead of questions deflecting? In my view, this is something many that support Biden do --- It would seem there is no defense of what Biden did. In fact, as VP did not flow protocol for removing records. " Top Secret" documents out of a protected SCIF are to be kept in a locked secure area. We know Biden did not lock any of the documents in secure areas. Unless you feel his garage door is secure.
  
  As you know a special counsel has been appointed to investigate Biden's taking and keeping Top Secret documents in an unsecured place for many years.
  
  Source of my view ---- https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2 … .%E2%80%9D
  reply report
  73
  Kathleen Cochranposted 16 months agoin reply to this
  Sharlee: When I disagree with you it is not because I don't understand you.
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 16 months agoin reply to this
  You are responding to a comment I made 5 WEEKS ago. Maybe avoid my comments. I find your posts very confusing. I have been polite and responded to your posts if you addressed me. But at this point, I am over it... Maybe this seems rude, but it's meant to be honest.
  
  https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/358 … ost4297640
  reply report
  72
  Miebakagh57posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  The analysis of the Obama, Pence, Trump, and biden cases is very simple and clear.
  Trump, was extremely targeted to breach criminal w activity, when the issue looks alike.
  reply report
2. 81
  peterstreepposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  The same can be said about Pablo Escobar.
  "There seems to have been far higher interest in pursuing Pablo Escobar compared to other public figures."
  
  Can it not simply be that Mr. Trump is working more often in the grey areas of the law than other politicians?
  reply report
  99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  That is very true. Escobar flaunted his wealth in front of the authorities instead of hiding it like so many other drug dealers so the US determined that he had to be eleminated to set an example.
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  "Can it not simply be that Mr. Trump is working more often in the grey areas of the law than other politicians?"
  
  Hard to say, so much of what he has been accused of turned out to be hit jobs. However, the new charges are very serious, and at this point, I feel he will have the opportunity to defend himself. I think I will hold onto the ideology that a person is innocent until proven guilty. If he did what he has been accused of, yes, he delved into very grey areas.
  reply report
  81
  peterstreepposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  To be honest I think the law (in most countries) are not the same for poor people and rich people.
  Seldom do you hear that millionaires are guilty of a crime, let alone serve a sentence. They can stall the juridical process a 100 years. (And thus innocent until proven is a flexible concept)
  If you are poor there are also no consequences for a judge to give a sentence.
  But if a judge gives a hard sentence to somebody with influence it could have personal consequences for his career and inner circle.
  You seldom hear that politicians and top businessmen are being convicted simply because the top judges and the politicians and millionaires are all part of the "ruling class". The class with money. It is not about Republicans or Democrats. It's about rich versus poor. If Trump can be convicted it is a danger to all ruling men. (Biden, Musk, etc included) So convicting somebody from the upper echelon is something unique.
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  I agree, I feel your sentiment makes great common sense.
  reply report
  72
  Miebakagh57posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  The thing is that the law is the same for both the rich and the poor. But if a poor person can't have the police, top politician, a judge, a billion on his/her side when going against the law, their finished. I was cross a railway track with 5 of my work mates to buy some fresh mangoes. The police arrested us. Statements are taken, and we're docked, and then bailed. After 2 days we appeared in Court before a Magistrate. A top civil servant, whose friend is a Judge, approached the later on our. The Judge buy the case and throw it into the wait bin.
  reply report
  81
  peterstreepposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  yes, that's a classic example. Miebakagh. The law may be the same for everybody but not everybody is the same for the law.
  reply report
  72
  Miebakagh57posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  You're welcome.
  reply report
  95
  Readmikenowposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  "To be honest I think the law (in most countries) are not the same for poor people and rich people."
  
  You are absolutely right. I've seen it in many places.
  reply report
  81
  peterstreepposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  This could change with AI. Because with AI you have the entire code of law at your disposal and super cheap. Lawyers and judges are rightly afraid of this technology. (and the super-rich too!)
  Because AI gives people with little money the same "weapons" as rich people.
  A dispute between a poor person and someone with lots of money no longer is a clear win for the person with the most money.
  Basically, with AI as a lawyer, you or I can take Elon Musk to court and win.
  reply report
  95
  Readmikenowposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  I think you are right again. This technology will changes things forever!
  reply report
  81
  peterstreepposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Yep. For good or for worse it will have a huge impact, comparable to the introduction of the Internet.
  reply report
  80
  Credence2posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  That's the best news I have heard all week,the potential for the big money people to not always prevail, simply because they have the money.
  
  It is one of those desirable goals that I have favored for a long time....
  reply report
  81
  peterstreepposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  It's difficult to predict where we are heading with AI.
  But yeah, this could be one of the positive things.
  AI in combination with surveillance is not so cool.
  
  With every new invention, you have people who use it for malicious things and people who use it to make the world a better place.
  You can build a house with a brick, or you can smash someone's brains in with a brick...
  reply report
  72
  Miebakagh57posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  That's remind me hat anyone can use an internet software, or a code, or a link to crack your personal bank detail. Seriously, and criically, that's one demerit of AI. It was streaming in that direction. And certain country's law makerr step in to limit its use. AI can land you in many trouble, if you're not careful, or intend to misuse it.
  reply report
  81
  peterstreepposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  I don't think we should be afraid for individuals using AI (The government might...so they will push stories about the dangerous effects AI can have when used by individuals. As it will be a danger to them.)
  We, as ordinary citizens, should be afraid of insurance companies using AI for knowing your pesonal behaviour pattern.
  Governments using AI together with surveillance and face recognition.
  Companies knowing your buying behaviour. (when the toilet paper is finished, so you will be reminded on your phone to buy new one.)
  AI will understand very quickly your political views. Your preferences in religion, sex, food, sports, transport, music, political view etc.
  AI can analyze you and know your better than yourself.
  And this knowledge is priceless for the open market. (Browser cookies do this thing in a very primitive way at the moment..compared to...)
  These are dangerous powers, especially in the hands of private companies.
  And as we all know companies misuse technologies all the time to make a profit and keep the shareholders happy. Ethics goes out of the window the moment there is an opportunity to make money.
  
  The code written today to organize AI is incredibly important. And it should be scrutinized and well thought about as it can include a lot of bias if it is only written by Western white men.
  
  There is a lot going on right now that will change the world as we know it.
  Just as the world before the mobile phone and the internet is completely different from today's. So will be the world completely different in 10 years time. (it will go verry fast) because of the introduction of AI.
  
  I think AI and the Climate Crisis are the two biggest things that will change our world between now and 10 years (and counting)
  reply report
72
Miebakagh57posted 18 months ago
The analyses of Trump, Pence, and biden cases is simple and clear. Trump seems to be purnish more as a criminal than anything else.
reply report
94
Kenna McHughposted 18 months ago
It's a sad state of affairs. Musk has a point.
reply report
1. 72
  Miebakagh57posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Yes, I agree.
  reply report
91
IslandBitesposted 18 months ago
Barr: Presenting Trump as victim after indictment is ‘ridiculous’

Former Attorney General Bill Barr said Sunday that presenting former President Trump as a victim of a “witch hunt” is “ridiculous” in reaction to the narrative presented by most in the GOP that the charges are politically motivated.

“It’s a very detailed indictment. And it’s very, very damning,” Barr told Shannon Bream on “Fox News Sunday. “And this idea of presenting Trump as a victim here, a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous.”

“Yes, he’s been a victim in the past. Yes, his adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims, and I’ve been at his side defending against them when he is a victim,” he added. “But this is much different. He’s not a victim here.”

Barr, who was appointed by and served as an attorney general under Trump, has been critical of the former president’s handling of classified documents. He said last week that the investigation was not a “witch hunt,” noting that the probe would not have gone anywhere if the former president just turned over the documents.

Barr said Sunday that the government acted responsiblly in looking into Trump’s handling of classified material, adding that it was Trump who “acted irresponsibly.”

“He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents,” he said. “Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has.”
reply report
1. 99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Right, because I am sure that no Puerto Ricans have EVER been victims of an illegal and politically motivated indictment.
  SMH!
  Try to think of this if it was occuring to someone else.
  reply report
  91
  IslandBitesposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  I dont think Bill Barr is going to read your comment.
  reply report
  99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  I dont think my comment was directed at Bill Barr. It was directed at a person who stated that since the prosecutor declared this was true this is true. Are you not aware that proscecutors have indicted and railroaded people in the past: Are you so really deranged with TDS that you are unwiling to accept that something like this can happen in 2023?
  reply report
  91
  IslandBitesposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  I must have been asleep when I "stated" all that.
  reply report
  99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Just repeating all of that info from the political prosecutor was quite enough. Are you saying now that you did not accept all of those "facts" that you repeated?
  
  Do you really think you are going to come off neutral regurgitating their lies?
  reply report
  54
  JimMoodieInVirginiaposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  She is not coming across as neutral. The funny thing is that a Puerto Rican native would not recognize the years and years that the US justice system have used fake indictments to railroad those Puerto Rican citizens it does not agree with is beyond belief.
  
  What does she think happened to those leftists in that island that opposed joining the US?
  reply report
  91
  IslandBitesposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  LOL
  
  What a ridiculously detailed psychoanalysis I got just from posting a pertinent quote without additional commentary.
  
  Great services, Hubpages!
  
  Assumptions galore.
  reply report
  99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Whatever. Do you not think that people have noted your bias in the past? Are you now claiming that you are turning over a new leaf and are going to try and qoute only neutral non-biased reports that do not lean towards your views?
  reply report
  91
  IslandBitesposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Enjoy!
  
  https://youtu.be/-eE7WlC3ArE
  
  FOXNEWS: 'RECKLESS': Bill Barr has words for Trump over handling of classified docs
  
  "...we have to wait and see what the defense says and and what proves to be true but I do think that even half what Andy McCarthy said which is if even half of it is true then he's toast..."
  
  "I think the government acted responsibly they gave him every opportunity to return those documents they acted with restraint they were very deferential to them and they were very patient they talked to him for almost a year to try to get those documents and he jerked them around found they finally went to a subpoena and what did he do according to the government he lied and obstructed that subpoena and then they did a search and they found a lot more documents and they're not even I don't think they're even sure now whether they have everything so they acted in a very patient way and and what were they were met with was according to the government and the and the indictment very egregious obstruction..."
  
  "...can't forget here that this entire thing came about because of Reckless conduct of the president...this particular episode of trying to retrieve those documents the government acted responsibly and it was Donald J Trump who acted irresponsibly..."
  reply report
  72
  Miebakagh57posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  eh he he! ah ah ha!
  reply report
91
IslandBitesposted 18 months ago
Former DHS official: Trump indictment paints ‘vivid picture’ of what national security community dealt with for four years

Former Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary for Counterterrorism Elizabeth Neumann on Sunday said former President Trump’s federal indictment paints a “vivid picture” of what the national security community dealt with for four years under his presidency.

“I found the indictment to be a really vivid picture for the American public of what the national security community dealt with for four years when he was president. He had a blatant disregard, just did not care to follow the rules,” Neumann said on ABC’s “This Week.”

“And not only did he not protect our country’s most sensitive secrets, that’s not protecting American lives — because you have military and intelligence community personnel that are now put at risk. You have assets, our foreign allies’ information is put at risk,” she added.
reply report
73
Kathleen Cochranposted 18 months ago
"Republicans still capable of reason": so described in a Politico opinion piece. Are there any?
reply report
1. 99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  I could also ask if there are any Democrats that do not support castrating gay children and pretending there are girls, and are there Democrats that do not support disinformation from the president about the COVID vaccines. (If you get the vaccine you will not come down with COVID,etc.)
  
  Yes, I am sure there are, but unfortunately most of them are still supporting the demented man who is in charge, telling lies, and persecuting his political enemies.
  reply report
2. 54
  JimMoodieInVirginiaposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  85
  Sharlee01posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  I don't think I have ever seen them stronger. I speak of the voters. It would be my view it is the Democratic party that has destroyed itself. In reality, they don't even have a viable candidate they can run in the next election, mind you as of yet. Biden has made a mess of the country, and it is clear by the polls more Americans are realizing that.
  Republicans seem to be very supportive of Trump even after the indictment. In my view, republicans are more dug in than ever.
  https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-news-p … ndictment/
  
  I follow Poles as of Friday Biden's polls are dropping, in fact, after this indictment of Trump his polls dropped (popularity polls) to the lowest they have been recorded at. 55.5. I think it will be interesting to view the polls this week to see what the people are thinking.
  
  https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/bi … al-rating/
  reply report
  54
  JimMoodieInVirginiaposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  85
  Sharlee01posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  I think the polls this week will be something to watch. Most likely it will offer a view into what Americans are thinking.
  reply report
  72
  Miebakagh57posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  I'm an outsider. Any general link or two for me to monitor the American Presidential Polls?
  reply report
  84
  tsmogposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Five Thirty Eight is your best bet for polls. They show all of them and keep current. Link following for polls.
  
  https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/
  
  Next, here is the link to the landing page for articles and so forth
  https://fivethirtyeight.com/
  reply report
  99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Interesting site. I bookmarked it.
  
  Based on those numbers and the average human lifespan, I think more US voters should realize that a vote for Biden will be a vote for Kamala as the next US president.
  reply report
  85
  Sharlee01posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Now this will sound biased on my part, and it is --- they voted for a very old confused man that did not campaign much and was (IMO) hidden in a basement. They won't hesitate to vote for a woman that is (to be kind) clearly over her head in her current job. It's an agenda, it's about holding power, And they are a pretty damming evil bunch, always have been.
  
  They could run a poodle, and many liberals would vote for that poodle. We are looking at a society that now is pretty driven by hate. Hate not only Trump but anyone that does not agree with them... What makes sense is a big no-no.
  reply report
  54
  JimMoodieInVirginiaposted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  85
  Sharlee01posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  I think your last sentence is very much relevant today.
  reply report
  72
  Miebakagh57posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  tsmog, the links are very helpful. I see Trump, is the leading Republican candidate. I wish him God's best. Much thanks.
  reply report
91
IslandBitesposted 18 months ago
John Bolton: Trump indictment ‘devastating’

Former national security adviser John Bolton said the federal charges brought against former President Trump last week are “devastating,” adding that the indictment should result in the end of his Trump’s political career.

“This is a devastating indictment,” Bolton, who served under Trump, said Monday on CNN. “I speak here as an alumnus of the Justice Department myself, because not only is it powerful, it’s very narrowly tailored. They didn’t throw everything up against the wall to see what would stick that this really is a rifle shot. And I think it’s, it should be the end of Donald Trump’s political career.”

“I hoped the Justice Department really does try for a speedy trial, because frankly, the sooner it goes to a jury, and we find out their answer, whatever, whatever that answer is going to be the better for the country,” Bolton said. “Justice delayed, as they say, is justice denied and the court should not let Donald Trump get the kind of delay I suspect he wants.”

“Donald Trump should immediately withdraw as a candidate for president,” Bolton tweeted. “Criminal charges are piling up around him. If Trump truly stood for America First policies, he would support the rule of law instead of continually flouting it. Withdraw now!”
reply report
73
Kathleen Cochranposted 18 months ago
One's judgement is a terrible thing to lose.
reply report
1. 99
  DrMark1961posted 18 months agoin reply to this
  Yes, it is sad. I agree am glad that your recognize your president is beyond redemtion. It is a shame that Biden is still in power despite that fact.
  reply report
2. 72
  Miebakagh57posted 17 months agoin reply to this
  Exactly.
  reply report
73
Kathleen Cochranposted 18 months ago
"neutral" is in the eye of the beholder.
reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

Political Differential Law Enforcement = Witch Hunt

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

Political Differential Law Enforcement = Witch Hunt

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies