Can justice exist in an environment of hypocrisy and double standards? Law should not be subjective.
Can justice exist in an environment of hypocrisy and double standards? Law should not be subjective.
I would like to believe that EVERYONE would believe in the concept of justice. There can be some debate about whether all/any laws are actually "just" and good. I don't really want to focus on that aspect in this post though I will acknowledge that it is a factor to consider.
Here I want to focus purely on whether it is even possible to have this thing called justice when the "laws" are applied hypocritically or only under double standards.
If X is alleged to have broken a law then they should be investigated. They should be treated as "innocent until proven guilty". Their life should not be stopped and/or destroyed by the investigative process. They deserve "due process". They should not sit in jail or have their funds and assets denied them for years without proof of guilt. Once they are PROVEN guilty then those things could be the consequences. They certainly should NOT be applied without such proof as that does damage during the investigative process even to people who may be innocent. We are supposed to treat them as innocent until we can PROVE guilt.
The problem is that it isn't supposed to be guilty until proven innocent. That is backwards and unjust.
This is true regardless of your race. This is true regardless of your political leanings. This is true regardless of your religion. This is true regardless of your sexual preferences. This is true regardless of your gender.
That's it. It is actually quite simple, but it is intentionally made confusing and more complicated so that the process can be corrupted.
Some examples that should raise eyebrows:
A navy man (Kristian Saucier) shows his family photos of the submarine he is on to share with his family. He is prosecuted and jailed.
Michael Flynn is vilified for basically what was entrapment and FBI saying he lied to them. I believe a lie requires intent. They have corrupted it so much that lack of memory, or simply not knowing and making a statement the FBI can call a lie. This makes it very easy for them to entrap people.
Paul Manafort. Dragged out of bed in a raid. Massive costs to defend legally. Definitely damages.
Judge Roy Moore had allegations/accusations of sexual assault, impropriety, pedophilia, etc from more than 3 DECADES ago. Not proven, but treated as fact. In fact the yearbook was completely debunked as a forgery. The lady admitted it. Claims he should step down and not run based purely on unproven accusations.
Trump. It'd take a long time to point our all the bias and focus on him.
Russian Collusion. If you haven't heard of this you've been sleeping since it has been being investigated for more than a year and is probably up to about $18 million in costs now. Not to mention it is operating under NO law. There actually is no law to create this special investigative body. It did exist at one time but it was allowed to expire in 1999. This means it was formed under no actual guiding law, oversight, etc.
Now let's look at the other side of the coin.
Hillary Clinton. She has gotten away with far more than the people above with not even a slap on the wrist.
She had many many classified and highest level top secret documents on a private server, and even on emails between locations and on her staffs laptops. She even had emails instructing her staff how to remove the classified stamps before faxing the document somewhere. When emails were demanded they DESTROYED them. This actually has happened multiple times.
FBI Director James Comey already had her exoneration written up before she was even interviewed. She has also been proven to not only lie to FBI, but has also lied to congress.
Collusion. She actually has colluded with the Russians. They do have the evidence of that. Not to mention she has also colluded with the Chinese and the Saudis. They actually have this evidence.
Has anything happened to her? No. In fact, some of this was known while she was still running. Not only did they not ask her to step down. They wanted her to win, and they were angry when she did not. Is this justice? To me it looks very injust and like a double standard. It looks as though laws only apply if you are political enemies of her and her supporters.
Keep in mind the navy man and his photo. Keep in mind Flynn. Keep in mind the entire collusion narrative.
How about Edward Snowden? How about Wikileaks?
Was any of what they revealed proven as false? No.
They pointed out crimes. Those perpetrating the crimes then turned the force of the world against them.
What came of these crimes that were not even denied? Nothing. Double standard. Unjust.
Wikileaks furthermore was given these documents. They did not steal them. They published them as any news outlet and journalist has the right to do. It is no different from the many stories every news outlet writes. The only difference here was the target of these stories. Again, a double standard.
Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning both broke the law in what they did. I do believe they did the right thing, but that goes into those OTHER factors related to laws that I didn't want to get into in this post. Are all "laws" just?
Yet when they pointed out the problem. What happened? The messenger became the target, not the crime and the criminals.
Senator Al Franken caught in his OWN photo showing him sexually harassing/assaulting a woman. Did he immediately resign? No. Though he was one of those that was calling for Roy Moore to step down on purely accusations alone. In fact, the media and Franken supporters were trying to compare the two. Al Franken had his own undeniable evidence. Though he kind of see sawed on the when he was going to resign. Some people that wanted Roy Moore to step down didn't want Franken to resign. Double standard. However, more accusers eventually targeted Franken and he has officially resigned.
Does this double standard find fertile soil in your mind?
Many people are fine for attacking over anything and everything as long as they don't like the target.
They miss that this is not justice. It is wrong.
Justice should be blind to political affiliations, religious affiliations, race/ethnicity, or gender. This is why lady justice is often shown wearing a blindfold.
I am not happy when I see injustice even applied to those I consider my enemy.
If you find yourself thinking KILL X, PUT X IN JAIL, etc then ask yourself this simple question.
If it was done by someone you like and support would you be saying the same thing?
If you cannot answer that as YES then you have a double standard and you do not actually believe in justice.
Imho: any law that gives different outputs based on whom is the subject of that law, should not exist. A good law should work like a computer program, specific variables and predictable output.
It is the double standards that frustrate us most.
Most believe if a crime was committed, then there should be a professional investigation and prosecution regardless of it the crime was committed by Trump & the Republicans or Hilary and the Democrats.
What is making us tear our hair out in frustration - is clearly suspected crimes are not being treated equally.
If I may suggest, the congress needs to put laws in place now, so the bureaucracy cannot stonewall their investigations. How silly is it, that the only way to enforce the law is to refer the bureaucrats back to the same bureaucracy that is doing the stonewalling for prosecution.
On a side note - what the Australian Government has allowed to happen to one of their own citizens is beyond disgusting.
These days the result of that would be no laws. :)
Okay - - Time to piss off a lot of people - - -
I believe the phrase is - - "no man is above the law" - -
Hillary is not a "man".
In fact I think Hillary saw herself as the first "Queen of America" - -
Her thinking was wrong. or was it, ever hear of the "Queen of England" being charged with a crime?
Amen! (In my head again and speaking the truth)
TRIGGERED!
If I comment more than that, this comment might exceed block limit.
I do agree ,that there is a double standard,and 3rd and 4th standard too.
You hit one of the key problems right on the head!
Namaste.
You me the "Just US" system..............
Excellent
They also abused their authority to persecute William Binney and Tom Drake - both acted to defend the constitution against those that defied it (all of whom took the same oath).
Then there was the telcom scandal under Bush - when it was revealed that both the government AND telcom companies (AT&T) were in blatant violation of the law for years, they not only changed the law to excuse themselves, they changed it retroactively! This was around the time Nancy Pelosi famously said "Impeachment is off the table" - effectively codifying their crimes - and the crime of their self serving remedy.
Its not only a double standard anymore, I think its much worse.
You can also look at Wells Fargo and their fraudulent accounts for billions. What happens? They get slapped with a fine that amounts to 3% of what they take. It shouldn't surprise anyone that they did it a second time. They likely will do it a 3rd, 4h, 5th. 3% is not a punishment it is a very profitable endeavor.
As far as I know no one has ever been arrested for that.
YES WE CAN, but we together have to make it happen.
The together Seems to be the issue in the time we are living...
you always have the best content dwinblood keep it up!
There's no such thing as justice. It's a manmade fantasy, a utopian ideal. We are animals. The strong thrive and survive; the rest are cannon fodder.
It's not beneath the elites to throw people under the bus: either punishment, deterent or just for the heck of it. Look at all those righteous people who got suicided or disappeared.
Nothing changes, just the names. Go as far back in history as you can. Repeated patterns.
The answer: I dunno. Strive towards strength. Don't be another pawn in their game. Fight. Resist. Spread awareness. Live by your own rules. Don't play their game. Fuck them all.
The media is very powerful at swaying the public to believe someone is guilty before they have had their day in court