The word of the day, which I hope to hear but alas will not, is โremandโ.
Sigh.
Pre-trial incarceration isn't meant to be a punishment. There's no interpretation of reality in which Trump represents a "flight risk".
@mcfate Two other words:โNational Securityโ.
I think there is room for a healthy debate about the natural tension and cross purposes of due process and national security, if we can start by agreeing that both are laudable and neither should be absolute.
Sorry, you don't get to do away with due process in the name of "national security".
That's autocracy.
Upsetting you isn't a threat to national security, anyway.
Maybe you missed it, but you just advocated for summary, extrajudicial, arbitrary imprisonment for anyone you feel like calling a "terrorist".
I'm not in favor of that.
@mcfate Wow. So much for healthy debate in the absence of absolutes. Take care.
Oh, were you debating? Usually that involves facts, not pointless rhetoric.
I mean, having scrolled up to the top, it looked like you were disappointed to be deprived of a chance to enjoy a sort of cheap sense of vengeance from seeing Trump "locked up". You were mad that he wasn't going to be "remanded", right?
You wanted him locked up for "national security", and due process be damned, apparently.
What did I miss here?
Gee, that'd be GREAT.
But "LOCK HIM UP!" isn't "healthy" OR "debate", it's precisely as bad as "LOCK _HER_ UP!"
This isn't actualy complex.
No, my friend it isnโt. He did not blindly chant โlock him up.โ He said the word of the day was โremand,โ explaining he is still committing crimes.
My concern is his active rallying of supporters to do exactly what he has already done. This is not a hollering situation. He is a threat to national security.
Too, being polite is not actually complex.
Look, you could scroll up, or I could explain AGAIN that you don't get to REMAND anyone for making you mad.
"Being a [notional] threat to national security", per se, isn't an actual crime, sorry.
That's the sort of charge they come up with in autocracies. If you feel differently, simply cite the relevant US Criminal Code under which you'd like to charge him.
You have to DO something to break the law. Not SAY stuff.
Why don't you find a better hobby?
"Better" than trying to insist that the Fourth through Sixth Amendments somehow don't apply in this particular case.
@Boyceaz
Two words: "due process".