What If
What If
What If
You're viewing a single thread.
So, do you want to drop "innocent until proven guilty" for every accusation by a woman or do you have some simpler system than "evidence presented in an adversarial trial" you'd like to filter them through?
The justice system is broken, and I don't know if it can be fixed. It is far too affected by Capital.
Nothing here is suggesting due process be skipped. The problem is that if he had his way, it definitely would be.
"just believe women" (emphasis mine) implies not applying the evidentiary standard or due process to accusations from women. If we apply due process we aren't just believing them, we are (also) verifying their claims.
But, like I said, the "justice" system is broken. Not only do we have ACAB issues, and DAs being political, but there's systemic bias against women and the marginalized from judges. (The "right" judge might not have a negative bias, but "on average" there seems to be a measurable effect/affect, tho it is hard to be sure you are comparing like with like when aggregating cases.) All of those are aggravated due to Captial being unequality distributed, and legally influencing 2.5/3 of those systems.
Trump isn't giving due process to the "illegal aliens". Why should we give it to him?
Because if we dehumanize persons, we are also fascists.
That said, Trump has gotten more than due process. He should be serving a sentence for he 43 (?) felony convictions, it is a miscarriage of justice for the sentence to have been nothing. And, that's not the only example of "the system" being corrupt in his favor.
While I still hope for reform, revolution is appropriate ever since SCOTUS ruled on presidential immunity (yes, under Biden).