Despite being classified as special government employees, the committee members are unpaid volunteers.
There’s no way this can be justified under the name of improving government efficiency. Trump is doing this solely because its a reminder of a national health crisis that he so devastatingly mismanaged.
FAKE NEWS! It was Kung Flu, the Chinese virus!
Good. This would have set an incredibly dangerous precedent for future administrations. The law should be amended; the governor shouldn’t have that kind of power in the first place.
So sad to see so many short-sighted, foaming at the mouth lemmings ITT. Not surprised, just sad.
My face! The leopards! The goggles! They do nothing!
All those questions deserve proper investigation. I was not excusing this man from his crimes, merely pointing out his lawyer was claiming he’d had a mental health crisis and that they should be investigated.
And I’m a pretty damn good therapist so I think I’m gonna keep it up. Maybe you should just go fuck yourself?
I’m a therapist.
Schizophrenia.
Per the article you linked to:
Dustin Tischler, Brafman’s attorney, said in a statement to the Herald on Monday night that his client “was experiencing a severe mental health emergency” when he opened fire.
Maybe don’t rush to judgment so much? Wait for more information.
No number of innocent people incarcerated on bad evidence is acceptable, much less executed. That’s why I’m saying the standard of evidence would need to be extremely high. Your argument is that there would inevitably be people executed who were innocent, but I don’t believe that needs to be the case. Standards could be such that having the crime on video is required or direct witnessing from multiple unimpeachable sources.
Is the standard of evidence and possibility of false convictions really your main concern here or do you just not think the State should ever execute people on moral grounds? Because I believe I’ve provided an acceptable answer to the former argument; if your issue is actually the latter then I believe we simply have a difference in ethical beliefs.
I don’t want it as a deterrent and I’m very aware there have been cases where convictions have turned out to be false. Obviously, the standards for evidence need to be very high. But some people do not deserve to live. And I’m not so certain about it not bringing some degree of closure to families; it certainly isn’t an antidote to grief and loss, but knowing the person who tortured and killed your loved one gets to keep living out their own life, even if behind bars can certainly haunt you as an injustice.
I’m aware of all the arguments against it, and I’ve changed my mind about this issue a couple times. It’s not something I take lightly at all. Still, I think in exceptionally vile and clear cases, it should be allowed.
This is why I support the death penalty. It should almost never be used, but for cases as extreme as this. The evidence also has to be rock-solid.
Unfortunately, it’s been used far too liberally and on a racial basis in the past, so a lot of people are against it.
I simply don’t think some criminals deserve to live out the rest of their lives, in a maximum security prison or otherwise.
I don’t think that Cheeto is capable of stringing together a coherent sentence that has any substance to it. It’s like he’s just trying to get through the interview with little meaningless fluff sentences.
Makes me wonder if he has some yet-to-be-properly-diagnosed aphasia.