WingNews logo WingNews
top | item 46469505

(no title)

Arodex | 1 month ago

Of course, amongst all the examples you could choose, you had to give a xenophobic example. There were no other example you could think of. You are seriously stating that the country who elected a sex offender (on top a being many other things like being a con man and an insurrectionist who tried to overturn a legitimate election and got away with it - hey, isn't that "offenses with "mitigating" cultural factors punished extremely lightly") should seriously screen foreign (very foreign) sex offenders who served their time.

discuss

order

bpodgursky|1 month ago

I picked the example of under-sentencing (and early release) which most people accept is the most clearly applicable. The fact that you know exactly what I'm talking about based on a very general statement about sex offense, is strong evidence you know it's true.

In terms of rhetoric, you can argue that Donald Trump is bad for his alleged sex crimes, or you can argue that the US is wrong for vetting tourists, but you can't reasonably argue both at the same time, those contradict each other.

Arodex|1 month ago

> is strong evidence you know it's true

No, it is strong evidence that I can hear the very noisy xenophobic propaganda and whistle.