miak

In that case, the trains will double as ovens. Now that’s efficiency!

I think the argument is more, “Sir, I’m the manager at this Walmart and I have no idea what these people were exchanging amongst themselves in the back aisle.”

Either way, double life + 40 years is a bullshit sentence for what this is.

Woah, woah woah. You need to check you facts on this one. He was not sentenced for trying to have people killed. He was publicly accused of murder for hire, but not charged. He was sentenced for running a website and the judge wanted to “make an example”

By all means link me a source that shows he was convicted of murder for hire if you think you can find one, but I can already tell you that you can’t.

I agree that Trump doesn’t care about the fentanyl issue. If he did, he’d be ending the war on drugs.

I would like to point out, Ross Ulbricht was sentenced for running a website, to double life plus 40 years in prison without possibility of parole. It was a bullshit sentence that came at the end of a trial of questionable integrity. The fact that neither Obama or Biden pardoned him is one more embarrassment for the Democrats.

…and pair that with “this is what you voted for when you voted third party or stayed home, to say nothing of directly voting for this mess,”

Lol, if that’s the approach the Dems are going to go with, I hope you loooove the current Republican regime. Attempting to shame people into voting for you is not likely to win much support.

Or they could have addressed both fentanyl in the US and the cartels in Mexico by just agreeing to end the war on drugs…

I’d argue that the will of the people has no correlation with what is moral. The will of the people can be just as immoral as the will of an autocrat. Tyranny of the majority is no better than tyranny of the few when it’s your neck the boot presses down on.

Lol, yeah I followed this trial as it was happening and I remember them bringing up this bullshit accusation, but then never actually charging him because the charge was exactly that, bullshit.

Meanwhile at the FBI during the investigation: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-silk-road-task-force-agent-pleads-guilty-money-laundering-and-obstruction

Often when I see someone accusing people of voting against their own interests, it’s pretty clear that the person making the accusation has not taken the time to understand the values others are basing their choice on.
If I could rob a person and be confident that I would never be caught and punished for doing so, am I acting against my own self interest if I chose not to rob them because it goes against my moral code? No, of course not. But based on the way some people talk about voting against ones self interest, you might think I just cheated myself out of free money. Is it possible that a person might “vote against their own interests” because of a misinformed view? of course, but you’ll never understand a person’s motivations by chosing to paint them with broad strokes based on your prejudices instead of getting to know them individually and trying to understand what it is they truly value.

I may be misremembering, but I believe the way things were originally designed was that the Senate was supposed to represent the states, not the people. The house represented the people. That’s why the Senate has equal representation (because the states were meant to have equal say), and the house proportionate to population.