That's not what inference means. Inference refers to rational conclusions based on existing trends in data, not wild speculation and accusation one is using to build a strawman fallacy.
Oh, you mean like your in unevidenced inference* of Biden’s character deficiency based on media material? You don’t know the guy.
Not to mention the obvious hypocrisy of accusing me if an inequivalence of scale, then constructing a hypothetical scenario that's completely on another planet from the situation at hand! What puppy was Hunter fucking Biden saving from a burning building? His retirement plans?
Well, the scale you ignore is that the house is burning unattended (PoliPolice are busy) in the dry season and the whole neighborhood (Country) is likely going up in flames. And it’s not Joe’s doing.
How is letting some asshole get away with fraud and negligence supposed to help resolve the "fire" in question? At best, this is a major distraction that everyone will be talking about for the next decade.
Ok: Hunter Biden is sentenced. In a fair and just world, his sentence would suspended or time served. Don’t @ me: I know what sort of sentences such crimes usually get and how they absolutely are based on recovery, payment of taxes, strong ties to the community and strong family support—all of which Hunter has done/has available. Far worse have gotten far less, including what was just elected as POTUS, and a LOT of others struggling with substance use/abuse but lacking names that we would recognize.
Dang! You really hate Hunter! And I thought I was tough on criminals!! Unfortunately, I have a lot of experience with drug addicts. I hate drugs. I hate what it does to people. However, I would caution to not judge people who are on drugs. Yes, I’ve seen addicts willing to sell their children for a hit (let alone lie on a federal form or lie on the taxes). I’ve seen reformed druggies who become great people. Yes Hunter has done some bad things. But all people deserve a second chance in my view.
Without the “blanket”, “openly encourage” and “absolutely draw the line” and my position is stronger and saner than yours appears to me.
Without those words, we aren't talking about the situation at hand. The one in which you're flipping the fuck out because someone criticized a nepotistic blanket pardon.
I did not openly encourage anything.
apnews.com
Yeah, they're equivalent.
It DOESN’T.
Ah, there's the root of the trouble. After all this, it was just a common spelling error. Charging someone for committing crimes that they actually committed is prosecution, not persecution.
Nope.
Thanks for the attempt at refinement of my lexicon. Now...
So argue your case with the dictionary people, @Politesse..
Exactly right, Tom. And that is a big part of what Poli is desperate to NOT recognize.
It doesn't. The two things aren't even connected. You're the one with the bullshit analogy, don't ask me to try and make sense of it.
No, I think it's a bad idea because it is nepotistic to use the pardon to excuse a family member from the crimes they committed, and encourages a culture of politically expedient pardons that shields the upper classes from prosecution for any crime, while the poor get sucked into an endless cycle of industrialized incarceration and unpaid labor. And it does fan the flames of anti-Democrat sentiment, as it does every time - which is quite often - that they reveal themselves to be different from the Republicans primarily in terms of scale rather than type of corruption and grift.
