Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Some Evangelical Leaders Speaking Out Against Separating Child/Parent Migrates
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="NotreDame" data-source="post: 72809979" data-attributes="member: 212558"><p>My post did not beg the question.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>C’mon to where exactly? None of these events are possible without probable cause to believe someone charged with a crime committed the crime. None. Want to avoid these consequences? Do not engage in criminal activity. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>He absolutely did poison the well as his loaded phrase assumes, as true, the prosecutor is being “needlessly harsh.” Similar to “he stopped beating his wife.”</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Restating an unproven premise as a reply to an argument doesn’t make any sense. Your charitable characterization of what he did makes what he did worse, not better.</p><p></p><p>And I do not have to make an argument for or against leniency because the argument, when you interjected yourself into the middle of the dialogue, was about blame. Whose to blame? </p><p></p><p>You’ve completely misread Illuvatar’s reply to me, as he was assigning blame to the prosecutor and DOJ. The argument was about blame, not leniency. </p><p></p><p>Someone else may have been discussing leniency but my interaction with Illuvatar, Camille, and others, was about blame.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That may be the premise of the thread, but Illuvatar, Camille, and others were discussing whose to blame, not leniency.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Greater extent? What are you taking about? There’s a statute they are being accused of violating and they are prosecuting people within the bounds of the statute. Where are you getting this greater extent idea?</p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>Where the facts show at least there is probable cause to believe a crime was committed? Yes.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="NotreDame, post: 72809979, member: 212558"] My post did not beg the question. C’mon to where exactly? None of these events are possible without probable cause to believe someone charged with a crime committed the crime. None. Want to avoid these consequences? Do not engage in criminal activity. He absolutely did poison the well as his loaded phrase assumes, as true, the prosecutor is being “needlessly harsh.” Similar to “he stopped beating his wife.” Restating an unproven premise as a reply to an argument doesn’t make any sense. Your charitable characterization of what he did makes what he did worse, not better. And I do not have to make an argument for or against leniency because the argument, when you interjected yourself into the middle of the dialogue, was about blame. Whose to blame? You’ve completely misread Illuvatar’s reply to me, as he was assigning blame to the prosecutor and DOJ. The argument was about blame, not leniency. Someone else may have been discussing leniency but my interaction with Illuvatar, Camille, and others, was about blame. That may be the premise of the thread, but Illuvatar, Camille, and others were discussing whose to blame, not leniency. Greater extent? What are you taking about? There’s a statute they are being accused of violating and they are prosecuting people within the bounds of the statute. Where are you getting this greater extent idea? Where the facts show at least there is probable cause to believe a crime was committed? Yes. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Some Evangelical Leaders Speaking Out Against Separating Child/Parent Migrates
Top
Bottom